Boundary Hedge

Richpie

Hello, 

I was wondering whether anyone could give me some advice? 

We have planning to do an extension to the rear of our property, and we want to take the leylandii hedge down which acts as a border to our neighbours. About 18 months ago our neighbour killed her side of the hedge (if you cut into them too deeply the don’t grow back) and hide the damage she’s erected a fence along the border (Not Completely on the border). She didn’t discuss at the time what she was planning to do but now we want to remove the hedge because some of it will need to go when start the build, she’s saying that the hedge is her boundary responsibility and we’re not allowed to remove it. So, I ‘ve checked the documentation on when we bought the property and the title deeds, and it says:

‘The boundary hedges on the North West and North East sides of the property hereby conveyed and the sites thereof ...... shall remain the property of the Vendors but each party shall cut and trim his own side’

 I’ve also checked the Law Society Property information form which is what the previous owners filled out when we bought the house and section 1.1 says:

Looking towards the property from the drive at the front who owns or excepting responsibility to maintain or repair the boundary features:

On left – Neighbour

On Right – Seller (the one we want to take down)

At the Rear – Seller

At the Front – Seller

 To my mind that sounds like the hedge is actually our boundary and not hers. Does anyone know whether she has any right or can I go ahead and remove the hedge?

eddddy

In general, trees and hedges belong to whoever's land they are planted in. So...

• if the 'trunks' are coming out of the soil on your side of the boundary, they belong to you.
• if the 'trunks' are coming out of the soil on your neighbours side of the boundary, they belong to them
• if the 'trunks' straddle the boundary, they are jointly owned

You can cut down a hedge that belongs to you. But you can't cut down a hedge that your neighbour owns or jointly owns without their consent.

But...

‘The boundary hedges on the North West and North East sides of the property hereby conveyed and the sites thereof ...... shall remain the property of the Vendors but each party shall cut and trim his own side’

What document did you get this from, and who does that document describe as 'the Vendors'?  That sounds like the hedges are owned by whoever was selling the property at the time - i.e. they're not owned by you or your neighbour.

I wouldn't rely too much on what the TA6 property information form says.

Why has this become an issue? Is the lack of a hedge detrimental to the neighbour in some way, or do you think it's just bloody-mindedness? For example, they don't want you to build the extension, so they're making a fuss about the hedge.

Ideally, you should try to find out what the cause of the issue is and see if you can find a way of addressing it. For example, if it's a privacy issue, suggest that you'll put up a 2m fence with a trellis on top to maintain privacy.

Norman_Castle

Is it clear where the boundary is? Hedges can be a few feet thick so are only a vague guide to where the actual boundary is. Who's land are the trees on? Show the neighbour the above and ask why she believes its her hedge.

princeofpounds

Basically, the hedge belongs to the person that planted it on their land. But there are a few more things worth saying:

Clearly your vendors believed they owned that hedge. That doesn't mean they are right, but it's some evidence.

The passage you mention in the deeds indicates that you own the hedge. However, it doesn't mean it is right to interpret it that way. People often overstate the importance of clauses like this in the deeds. The hedge referred to may no longer exist, the current trees being planted separately many years later to the hedge this conveyance refers to. But, it's some evidence.

The fact that the neighbour has fenced off her land, is an indication of where she thinks the boundary is. The normal presumption is that you would fence to the fullest extent of your land. It's not strong evidence, as the hedge itself could be an alternative boundary marker, but again, it's something. 

So, I suggest you download her plan and title from the land registry. See if it reveals anything further. Then, politely and in writing ask her to share with you any evidence of her ownership of the hedge with a reasonable deadline, as the evidence you have does not agree with that position (you can relate it to her, if you like). Then see if she manages to produce anything.

If not, then I would basically stay quiet until the day you want to cut them down, then just get on and do it. 

All this assumes of course that you can't have a sensible negotiation with her about alternative screening.

theoretica

Richpie said:

‘The boundary hedges on the North West and North East sides of the property hereby conveyed and the sites thereof ...... shall remain the property of the Vendors but each party shall cut and trim his own side’

Is this hedge to NE or NW boundary of your property?

If she has trimmed her side, and you trim your side perhaps they won't survive?

Richpie

Thanks for they replies. The 'trunks' sort of straddle the boundary, they are more on our side than hers. There shouldn’t be any detriment as she’s cut her side of the hedge back to the trunks and already erected a 2m (well its 207cm tall) fence up.

‘The boundary hedges on the North West and North East sides of the property hereby conveyed and the sites thereof ...... shall remain the property of the Vendors but each party shall cut and trim his own side’

 Comes from land register. Register of title document and I think Vendor refers to the seller.

You nailed it on head. it's definitely just bloody-mindedness because she tried every trick in the book to prevent the planning on the extension from going through. So, the only thing left is the hedge to complain about.

Thanks for the suggestion about the trellis, I was going to suggest that to her but because she’s already put a fence up, I’m not sure you could attach it.

I’ll download her title and deeds now and see what I can find. Thank you all. 

m0bov

If she has fenced to the boundary the remaining hedge would only be yours anyway.

If she later claims you've removed her hedge, you could claim the same when the fence went up.

If she wants to argue the ownership, then ask her to remove the hedge from your property not foot the bill. Either way she is going to loose this one 

Herbalus

If she’s put the fence up just inside her boundary, you wouldn’t be able to attach a trellis onto it as itd be on her land. You could erect your own fence next to it on the boundary or just inside your own land and attach trellis to that. It might look a bit silly though.

but I suspect trellis isn’t really the issue here.

brianposter

Richpie said:

‘The boundary hedges on the North West and North East sides of the property hereby conveyed and the sites thereof ...... shall remain the property of the Vendors but each party shall cut and trim his own side’

That sounds more like the neighbouring house once owned the OPs property and remains the owner of the hedge.

Norman_Castle

If you do remove them take plenty of photographs showing their exact location with regard to the boundary.

She may be concerned that once the hedge is removed her fence would be in the wrong place with regard to the boundary.

Mickey666

Norman_Castle said:

If you do remove them take plenty of photographs showing their exact location with regard to the boundary.

She may be concerned that once the hedge is removed her fence would be in the wrong place with regard to the boundary.

. . . or, her fence could BECOME the boundary and therefore wouldn't be in the 'wrong place' at all!

"Boundaries" are imaginary lines that divide two legal properties.

"Boundary markers" are physical things that help to define the legal boundary and can be a wall, a fence, a hedge or a length of string.  Whatever they are, they will the property of one of the adjacent property owners.

So far, so simple.  The problem in practice is that boundaries can move over time!

The deeds to a property are almost never accurate enough to fully define the location of a boundary.  This is well established and is not even their primary purpose.  They INDICATE the approximate location of the property boundaries and rely on a 'boundary marker' to define the boundary on the ground.

In this case it sounds like the original boundary marker was the leylandii hedge.  However, the purported owner of the hedge has since erected a fence on their side of the hedge.  This makes the 'boundary' less clear and if the hedge was removed the fence would become the de facto 'boundary marker' and thus the new legal 'boundary' . . . even if it has moved a few inches!

I'd suggest looking on https://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/boundaries.html  and the associated discussion forum where they deal with this sort of thing all the time: https://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=4   In particular, read the 1st and 4th threads on that forum for a good introduction about how boundaries can move over time.