Neighbour blocked garage with fence

Mojisola

Johnny123123 wrote: »

Yes I mean to widen existing one. There is an existing drop kerb but now only a small chunk is on my side of the fence, so yes I mean widen that bit. :beer:

westernpromise wrote: »

It's clear from what we've read that all these houses were built this way with garages accessible only if access were shared, something evidently not put into the original titles because nobody in the 1920s imagined anyone would be so staggeringly selfish as to obstruct their neighbours' garage access.

With the evidence that both houses had garages at the back and the single access dropped kerb, I think you could prove that there was historical access for both houses - but life will probably be easier if you go with the new arrangement.

pinkshoes

Johnny123123 wrote: »

I will just use it as a shed for storing stuff.

Like a motorbike project??

You could wheel it out onto your side of the driveway every day when your neighbour is enjoying his dinner or outside, and rev the engine to marvel at the wonderful noise it makes.

Don’t forget to thank your neighbour for giving you the space you have always wanted for a motorbike now you can no longer get the car in the garage.

moneyistooshorttomention

westernpromise wrote: »

I was thinking more that as you can't access your garage any more the space is wasted so you'd extend right to the boundary, block the neighbours' light and so on - unless of course they agree to a right of way to the garage. If they are as massively and spitefully selfish as they seem, I would reciprocate.

Comes under heading of "bite nose off to spite face" imo:rotfl:. Massive expense and hassle for very little more space and everyone thinking he was a right b*tch.

Yeah - well worth it - NOT...:cool:

Davesnave

westernpromise wrote: »

This being so, why not improve your own property at the expense and direct loss of the neighbours? What can they possibly say?

Mainly because nobody extends by 1.25m for economic and practical reasons that are so blindingly obvious I don't need to state them. A right to light would exist for the neighbour too.

teddysmum

My son lives in one of the modern semis, where the two joined houses are of different design, with their mirror image across a private access road which leads to their rear drive and garage, while giving access to two pairs of semis, with parking spaces, in a cul de sac.


On the plans my son and the mirror image's occupant each own half the width of the access road, for the length occupied by their premises (don't know the situation beyond).


If either party was to build a fence down the centre, this would block access for all 6 homes concerned, as the road is not wide enough for two vehicles to pass each other , so obviously the planners, even in recent times, expect the space to be shared with consideration. (The situation, hopefully well into the future, will be interesting, should this area need repair, as two properties own it, but six use it).

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

westernpromise wrote: »

It's clear from what we've read that all these houses were built this way with garages accessible only if access were shared, something evidently not put into the original titles because nobody in the 1920s imagined anyone would be so staggeringly selfish as to obstruct their neighbours' garage access.

OK. Let me explain this one more time.

The neighbour currently cannot use his own land because the OP wants to drive his car back and forth over it. He might want to keep plants on it. Or bins. or whatever. it doesn't matter. He can't use it and has to put up with the OP driving, without any legal right, his car over it right next to his house at all times of the day.

The neighbour probably checked before he bought his house, five years before OP arrived, that there was no right of access and bought the house on those grounds. But then the OP got his new mini and has to keep it in the garage, regardless of any annoyance that causes anyone else. He didn't ask, because he never bothered checking. He just started driving over the neighbour's land.

The neighbour, who is being caused a lot of annoyance, has decided to fence off his garden so the OP can no longer use it. This results in a minor inconvenience to the OP.

However to you the neighbour is being "staggeringly selfish" for not putting the OPs desire to put a car in the garage over his own enjoyment of his own property.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

pinkshoes wrote: »

Like a motorbike project??

You could wheel it out onto your side of the driveway every day when your neighbour is enjoying his dinner or outside, and rev the engine to marvel at the wonderful noise it makes.

Don’t forget to thank your neighbour for giving you the space you have always wanted for a motorbike now you can no longer get the car in the garage.

And maybe then the neighbour will decide to pour battery acid over the shiny new mini while the OP is asleep. And it would serve him right, if he behaved in such a petulant, childish way when nobody has done anything they didn't have a perfect legal and moral right to do.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

teddysmum wrote: »

My son lives in one of the modern semis, where the two joined houses are of different design, with their mirror image across a private access road which leads to their rear drive and garage, while giving access to two pairs of semis, with parking spaces, in a cul de sac.


On the plans my son and the mirror image's occupant each own half the width of the access road, for the length occupied by their premises (don't know the situation beyond).


If either party was to build a fence down the centre, this would block access for all 6 homes concerned, as the road is not wide enough for two vehicles to pass each other , so obviously the planners, even in recent times, expect the space to be shared with consideration. (The situation, hopefully well into the future, will be interesting, should this area need repair, as two properties own it, but six use it).

They might well own half each, but are you saying nobody has right of access over it? I would doubt that.

If it needs repair it's up to each owner to repair the part they own; nothing to do with anyone with right of way over it.

JMW77

My friend lives in a house like this and all the houses in the street are the same, not one of the houses has a fence up the middle as both houses have access to the garages but can't park and block the driveway . Its obvious you must have access to the garage it goes without saying.
I would argue this especially if its standard layout in the street and no one else has a fence.
It wasn't written in deeds as its common sense.

mistertea

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

OK. Let me explain this one more time.

The neighbour currently cannot use his own land because the OP wants to drive his car back and forth over it. He might want to keep plants on it. Or bins. or whatever. it doesn't matter. He can't use it and has to put up with the OP driving, without any legal right, his car over it right next to his house at all times of the day.

The neighbour probably checked before he bought his house, five years before OP arrived, that there was no right of access and bought the house on those grounds. But then the OP got his new mini and has to keep it in the garage, regardless of any annoyance that causes anyone else. He didn't ask, because he never bothered checking. He just started driving over the neighbour's land.

The neighbour, who is being caused a lot of annoyance, has decided to fence off his garden so the OP can no longer use it. This results in a minor inconvenience to the OP.

However to you the neighbour is being "staggeringly selfish" for not putting the OPs desire to put a car in the garage over his own enjoyment of his own property.

Meanwhile, in the real Word... Dropped kerb allowing vehicular access to shared driveway (2.5m wide,1.25m owned by each house) allowing vehicular access to two rear garages (things originally built for storing cars). Like that since 1969 with all properties on the street having the same setup. Sneaky neighbour waits until OP takes car out then erect's a fence with no prior notice.