Fence Ownership - interpreting title plans/registers?

Ithaca

I have two pieces of apparently conflicting information regarding ownership of a fence boundary - I would be grateful for some thoughts on how to resolve it.

Two properties adjoined roughly west-to-east: House 1 to the west and House 2 to the east.

For House 1 the Land Registry property register states:  "[...] the fences on the South and East sides form part of the premises hereby conveyed and the fence on the North side forms part of the adjoining property on that side".  I interpret that as the fence to the east is owned by House 1.

But the title plan appears to show the property on the east ("House 2", where the red X is) as owning the fence, they look a bit like "T" marks but not 100% clear (edit: on reflection I think those are boundary markers for the gardens, just not extending the whole way):




The title plan of the house to the east however (House 2) makes no reference to fences or boundaries at all, and doesn't appear to show any ownership "T" markings (the blue X is the property above, House 1):


Am I correct in thinking that House 1 (the blue X) is responsible for the fence based on the wording in their property register and absent anything to the contrary in the register for House 2? Does the register take precedence over the plan drawing?

davidmcn

Neither of the plans indicates anything about ownership of the fences. It would seem reasonable to go with the narrative in the house which mentions the fences. Of course, that assumes that the present day fences are the same as the fences referred to in the title.

Ithaca

davidmcn said:

Neither of the plans indicates anything about ownership of the fences. It would seem reasonable to go with the narrative in the house which mentions the fences. Of course, that assumes that the present day fences are the same as the fences referred to in the title.

Many thanks.  The fence line is the same as the title plan, but I suspect the physical panels are no longer the originals (title is from 1962-1964).  So bit like Trigger's broom ("twenty years old... 17 new heads and 14 new handles") it's an interesting question  whether the wording in the register assumes perpetual maintenance of the fence line, or just confirms ownership of the panels themselves.

greatcrested

Ownership or the original fences is as defined in the Title. But if, since then, those fences have been replaced by one of the neighbours, then the neighbours in question now own them.

Bear in mind that ownership of a physical fence is not the same as ownership of the (infinitively narrow) boundary.

Mickey666

Another thing to consider is that the owner of a fence is not always obliged to actually maintain it.  Indeed, if they own it then they could, if they wished, take it down altogether.  I've known two cases where neighbours have fallen out because one of them wanted the other to replace his very dilapidated fence. In one case the owner of the fence removed it altogether and replaced it with a single strand of wire!

Ithaca

greatcrested said:

Ownership or the original fences is as defined in the Title. But if, since then, those fences have been replaced by one of the neighbours, then the neighbours in question now own them.

Bear in mind that ownership of a physical fence is not the same as ownership of the (infinitively narrow) boundary.

Thank you.  For additional context I'm in House 2 and our neighbours in House 1 have asked to go 50:50 on the cost of the new fence, but on the basis that it's our fence to start with. 

If the previous owners of *our* house replaced the original fence panels some time in the distant past that would mean ownership of the physical fence panels sits with me, but ownership of (and responsibility for?) the boundary still sits with the neighbours as per the title? Which presumably gives them the right to remove the current (knackered) fence and replace with one of their choice (incl. the notional "single wire" if they chose)?

Does the specific reference to "fence" ownership rather than "boundary" ownership suggest it was just a legacy from when the developers put the panels in where they wanted to be clear who owned the physical panels?

In reality it's £170 to avoid an argument and get a nice new fence, but the challenge I have in House 2 is that our back fence is 6 panels wide of which only three will be replaced as part of the offer from the neighbours, which then means I either have to fork out to have the remaining panels sorted at my own cost or live with a mismatched fence.

princeofpounds

Ithaca, in practical terms these mentions of fencing in the deeds and on the plan mean less than you seem to think they do.

T marks on a plan usually indicate responsibility for a boundary. But that is just a convention - to have any effect they need to be described in the deeds. In theory T marks can be used for other things. Sometimes they appear and they mean nothing (that seems to be the case in your example).

It doesn't matter which set of deeds anything is mentioned in. It is quite common for one set of deeds to be totally silent.

Being responsible for a boundary often means much less than people think it does. It usually (but technically not necessarily) indicates ownership of the original fence. It does not necessarily mean the fence needs to stay - often the responsible party could just have any kind of boundary feature they liked. There is often no obligation to fence. If the fence is replaced, it is owned by the person who replaced it. 

Assuming you haven't left anything out... All your deeds tell you is that the person in house 1 did originally own the fence to their east. The plan drawings tell you nothing. We don't know if the fence in place is the same as the old one. If it is, house 1 owns it and can do what they like with it (this would probably be the default assumption, especially if the boards face the 'right' way i.e. 'outer' face on your side). If house 2 put it up, you own it. If you don't know, you don't know. There is no obligation for anyone to repair the fence, put in a new fence, or anything else.

Your neighbours want a new fence? They can put one up. You want a new fence? You can put one up. You both want a new fence? You both share a new fence, or your build two new fences if you don't want to share.

Ithaca

princeofpounds said:

Ithaca, in practical terms these mentions of fencing in the deeds and on the plan mean less than you seem to think they do.
[...]
Your neighbours want a new fence? They can put one up. You want a new fence? You can put one up. You both want a new fence? You both share a new fence, or your build two new fences if you don't want to share.

This is a sensible way of looking at it, thank you.
The "tea-and-cake" approach feels like it will be more productive than quoting from 60 y/old title plans etc, so I'll go round over the weekend and see what we can sort out.

robatwork

Very wise.

In reality even if you could prove "ownership" of the boundary that wouldn't prove ownership of the fence. It could be on your side of the boundary by 1cm and be 100% yours.  The only sensible action in England with fences is to 1) be prepared to do all the work yourself on all your fences 2) try to negotiate and go halves. 

If you came at me waving title plans they'd quickly become toilet paper even if you didn't need the toilet. Cake is the way.

maloricsmam

We have a 6ft boarded party fence (not the 3ft high post & single cross rail original put in when houses were built in 2004), in mid 2005 my then neighbour (now moved and house is rented out) asked me to split the cost of the new fence and gates to our gardens, her 2 brothers who were joiners offered to erect the new fence/build gates to save costs and asked if I minded if the posts were placed on my side which I wasn't bothered about as I intended to erect a trellis for climbers.
With length of time that's passed, bad weather, heavy winds at times the fence posts have started to rot at the base where they are in the soil and are in danger of collapsing I currently have them fastening up (with a nylon covered metal cable) from the middle post across the garden to my tree on the opposite side but 5 posts are going to need replacing (estimate for posts replacing £150), I have removed the trellis/climbers and noticed all the cross rails where they join posts and some of fence boards are also rotted from where the climbers had wrapped around posts. We are in the process of preparing the house for sale and so money is a bit tight, am I within my rights to ask the landlord to pay toward the repair and if they refuse am I obliged to replace the fence with the current 6ft high one? 
Just wondering what my options are  as we don't have access to the deeds as the property is still mortgaged.

ElephantBoy57

maloricsmam said:

 We are in the process of preparing the house for sale and so money is a bit tight, am I within my rights to ask the landlord to pay toward the repair and if they refuse am I obliged to replace the fence with the current 6ft high one? 
Just wondering what my options are  as we don't have access to the deeds as the property is still mortgaged.

It's all up for negotiation, you can ask all you want; its a personal choice of what they want to do.