Trespass

Sandtree

lincroft1710 said:

The woman can only sue and unless she can prove the OP's "trespass" caused damage to her property any case would be dismissed

Actually no, trespass to property is one of the few common law torts that have strict liability and is actionable per se. Obviously without damage then compensation is nominal however trespass action is often to try and get an injunction rather than damages

Salemicus

Section62 said:

I think what matters here is the nature of the agreement between the people who own the road. They have, presumably, given each other like rights to pass over each other's land which makes up the private road, or possibly only that part which needs to be used to access their own property. The specific wording of that agreement is important. E.g. if it says the road can only be used by the owner and their visitors then Mr Johnson cannot give Ms_Chocaholic permission to use it as she is, as she would be using it as a 'cut through' rather than for the purposes of 'visiting' Mr Johnson. If Ms_Chocaholic uses the road to (genuinely) visit Mr Johnson that would be fine, and she doesn't need to leave the way she arrived, so using the 'cut through' would be Ok so long as the principal purpose had been to visit Mr Johnson.

Even though he is the landowner, Mr Johnson's right to grant other people rights will be constrained by the pre-existing agreement.

What also matters is the nature of the 'cut through'. Does it connect one public right of way to another, or is it being used to access private property?

Completely irrelevant and misleading. Landowner can absolutely give OP license to be on his land, and OP is there with said license. The neighbour has no cause of action against OP. Now, you may be right that by giving the license to OP, the landowner is breaching some hypothetical agreement with the neighbour. But that doesn't invalidate the license, that's not how contracts work. It just means the neighbour can sue the landowner for breach of contract. Just imagine the damages she could recover!

user1977

Ms_Chocaholic said:

An owner of a property on the opposite side of the road keeps filming me and telling me she will speak to her solicitor about this.

How long has she been saying that? Any sign of a letter from her solicitor yet? I wouldn't worry.

Might even be better to encourage her to speak to her solicitor, who might drum some sense into her.

bouicca21

Falafels said:

bouicca21 said:

It can be a privately owned road and still be a public highway - we have loads of them round my way.  The frontagers hate people using the roads and get very bad tempered, but there’s not a lot they can do about it.

By definition, a private road can't be a public highway, i.e. a road which is maintained at public expense.

However, it can certainly have a public right of way on it. We've recently moved to a house on a private road which has one; the RoW is signposted at one end, and the other end peters out into a track leading onto open countryside and is used by dog walkers. It's all very nice!

Definition of a public highway is one that the public have the right to use, not that it is maintained at public expense.  Round my way local bigwig sold off bits of his estate and laid out roads, He retained ownership of the roads  (and the descendants still own them) but the new building plots all had covenants obliging their new owners to maintain them.  Over the years some have been adopted but many haven’t - you can tell which ones by the potholes!  

Section62

Salemicus said:

Completely irrelevant and misleading. Landowner can absolutely give OP license to be on his land, and OP is there with said license. The neighbour has no cause of action against OP.

I don't believe I said otherwise.

Salemicus said:

Now, you may be right that by giving the license to OP, the landowner is breaching some hypothetical agreement with the neighbour.

So not "Completely irrelevant and misleading" then?

Salemicus said:

But that doesn't invalidate the license, that's not how contracts work. It just means the neighbour can sue the landowner for breach of contract. Just imagine the damages she could recover!

The OP's question was whether the complainant could "do anything about this".

If there is some form of agreement as I speculated, and you agree that the complainant could take action against Mr Johnson on the basis of a breach of that agreement, then the answer to the OP's question is "yes".

And invalidation of the license becomes irrelevant if Mr Johnson chooses to withdraw it in preference to facing legal action by the complainant (possibly joined by the other neighbours when they realise the potential consequences of Mr Johnson's generosity).

So the question is whether there is an agreement regarding the use (and maintenance) of the road, and what the terms of that agreement are.  Since none of us know, we can neither confirm it, nor dismiss it out of hand.

FreeBear

user1977 said:

Ms_Chocaholic said:

An owner of a property on the opposite side of the road keeps filming me and telling me she will speak to her solicitor about this.

How long has she been saying that? Any sign of a letter from her solicitor yet? I wouldn't worry.

Might even be better to encourage her to speak to her solicitor, who might drum some sense into her.

But if this individual doesn't have Ms Chocaholic's true name and address, there is no chance of a letter arriving, and even less chance of it going to court.

lincroft1710

Sandtree said:

lincroft1710 said:

The woman can only sue and unless she can prove the OP's "trespass" caused damage to her property any case would be dismissed

Actually no, trespass to property is one of the few common law torts that have strict liability and is actionable per se. Obviously without damage then compensation is nominal however trespass action is often to try and get an injunction rather than damages

But OP appears not to have trespassed on this woman's property, which is why I wrote "trespass" in inverted commas. Obviously if the woman's property ownership extended the full width of the road then she could take out an injunction against the OP

Sandtree

lincroft1710 said:

Sandtree said:

lincroft1710 said:

The woman can only sue and unless she can prove the OP's "trespass" caused damage to her property any case would be dismissed

Actually no, trespass to property is one of the few common law torts that have strict liability and is actionable per se. Obviously without damage then compensation is nominal however trespass action is often to try and get an injunction rather than damages

But OP appears not to have trespassed on this woman's property, which is why I wrote "trespass" in inverted commas. Obviously if the woman's property ownership extended the full width of the road then she could take out an injunction against the OP

It would certainly seem like they haven't however it was your comment that they must prove damage has been caused that I was correcting as if they are attempting a claim for trespass there is no need for damage unlike other torts 

Jeepers_Creepers

Ms_Chocaholic said:

Just to clarify Mr Johnson’s property is the only one on that side of the road. The others are all opposite

Cool! Sorted! Enjoy :-)

(That's the post I was intending to reply to before...)

So you are only walking on Mr J's part of the road. Oh, the potential for fun here is huge. Like, um, tight-rope walking along the centre line, going 'oops!' when you stagger over to her side - with a wink and a 'sue me then'. Or, hopping and kipping along an imaginary line a half-inch to Mr J's side of the road centre, whilst waving constantly throughout. Or...or...going there at night and painting white lines down t'middle, by which I - of course - mean a good foot into OW's side.

Yes, I can be that childish.

Ms_Chocaholic

Jeepers_Creepers said:

Ms_Chocaholic said:

Just to clarify Mr Johnson’s property is the only one on that side of the road. The others are all opposite

Cool! Sorted! Enjoy :-)

(That's the post I was intending to reply to before...)

So you are only walking on Mr J's part of the road. Oh, the potential for fun here is huge. Like, um, tight-rope walking along the centre line, going 'oops!' when you stagger over to her side - with a wink and a 'sue me then'. Or, hopping and kipping along an imaginary line a half-inch to Mr J's side of the road centre, whilst waving constantly throughout. Or...or...going there at night and painting white lines down t'middle, by which I - of course - mean a good foot into OW's side.

Yes, I can be that childish.

Can I give you the full postal address so you can do all of these things on my behalf