We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
CONSERVATORY/BOUNDARY/RIGHT OF WAY
Options
Comments
-
KEMYST said:But its hard man!Yes it is - to begin with. It is cathartic when you actually do it - it just highlights the disparity in reasonableness.You are keeping calm. You are willing to talk. You are acting on the facts which control the situation, and are being guided by them.They rant and bully. Let's be frank - they are effectively intimidating you into hopeful capitulation.If you demonstrate that you can stand there and look at them firmly and state your case clearly and calmly without being distracted from the key points, they are effectively stuffed.Remember - you hold the key :-)(So will they - but they can't...quite....reach...through...the ...wee...gap...to...get...to...the...DAMN! I dropped the key... )When is this build supposed to start? I would strongly suggest you get your gate in before then, so it's not seen as 'retaliatory' or an attempt at restricting access, and that in turn means you need to have this chat if at all possible before then.The ideal situation is that they realise they're nobbled - if they go ahead and fit a trespassing door, they won't be able to use it - and will then discuss other options. Ideally an exit route further down that boundary near its entrance.
1 -
Jeepers_Creepers said:
Did you ask the solicitor about fitting a gate on your land? Every single article I have found on this makes it 100% clear that you are allowed to do this, and it must be either kept unlocked or a key given to all those entitled to use it.From looking at your photo, it seems pretty clear that your paved area goes right up to that current gate and yellow wall. It's a pretty safe assumption, then - allowing for what the deeds plans show - that the paved area is 'yours'. So, yes, you can erect your gate and panel on there - I'd keep the furthest edge of the posts a half-inch in from the wall line tobesure tobesure.
....Once built, you either leave it unlocked, or give them a key to the lock you've fitted. Let them ponder how they can access the lock to open the gate via a connie door they cannot first open...So, if you want to nip this whole issue, I think that's something you can do right away.
Although KEMYST is entitled to put up a gate on his land, there's a difference between putting up a gate and putting up a gate which you know (or can reasonably foresee) will impede the RoW by design.
For example, by having a gate which can only be locked/unlocked from one side.
KEMYST needs to be cautious here because the proximity of his proposed gate and the conservatory door (and the existing gate) which together could impede the RoW. Some of that potential impediment is the neighbour's doing, but KEMYST adding a gate now will compound the existing issues.
Although the gate would be a good way of stopping an outward opening door being fitted, it isn't something which could be done with absolute impunity - not least because it would block/hamper the means of urgent/emergency egress from a dwelling, and that isn't something to do lightly.
0 -
Section62 said:Although KEMYST is entitled to put up a gate on his land, there's a difference between putting up a gate and putting up a gate which you know (or can reasonably foresee) will impede the RoW by design.
Although the gate would be a good way of stopping an outward opening door being fitted, it isn't something which could be done with absolute impunity - not least because it would block/hamper the means of urgent/emergency egress from a dwelling, and that isn't something to do lightly.I thought there was already a gate there - KEMYST is just going to replace it with a solid one.I can't see any need for a lock on the gate that goes between the neighbour and KEMYST - it's more usual to want one on the gate that leads out onto the street, rather than between neighbours.KEMYST can have a gate opening onto their land - if the neighbour puts in a door that opens out instead of onto their property and then can't use the ROW, that's their choice.0 -
Section62 said:I've mentioned it before, but I think it is important enough to be worth mentioning again.
Although KEMYST is entitled to put up a gate on his land, there's a difference between putting up a gate and putting up a gate which you know (or can reasonably foresee) will impede the RoW by design.
For example, by having a gate which can only be locked/unlocked from one side.
KEMYST needs to be cautious here because the proximity of his proposed gate and the conservatory door (and the existing gate) which together could impede the RoW. Some of that potential impediment is the neighbour's doing, but KEMYST adding a gate now will compound the existing issues.
Although the gate would be a good way of stopping an outward opening door being fitted, it isn't something which could be done with absolute impunity - not least because it would block/hamper the means of urgent/emergency egress from a dwelling, and that isn't something to do lightly.That's worth saying, S62, but it's not the idea at all.The RoW - as it stands - will remain unaffected by the new gate. The new gate's lock will be accessed from both sides, in an equal manner. In function, it'll be little different to what's currently there.But, once the new gate is up, should the neighb then proceed with a design of build which has an outwards-opening door which will swing over Kem's land, they should twig that to enable their new door to be opened from the inside, they'll first need to find a way of unlocking the new gate, and that will require the unopenable door to first be opened; they will discover the meaning of Catch 22. An oxy of a door, if you prefer.The only way to actually open their door from the inside would be to send someone right around the property, up the RoW, and unlock the gate from Kem's side. Whereupon it'll be locked by Kem again whenever he feels like it.Bottom line - their proposal for an outward-opening door that will swing over Kem's premises is trespass and wrong. There are undoubtedly legal ways to stop it - as would apply to an opening window, gutter, soil pipe, etc crossing over the boundary - but Kemyst doesn't want to go that route ('cos he doesn't have youknowwhat).I think a solution has been arrived at.I would suggest to Kem that he has the 'conversation' asap, so he can then decide how to proceed. He wants that gate up before work begins. The metal gate can remain - I suspect it's on the IND's land, so is best just left for them to sort. Keep things simple.If Kem knows where the new connie door will be located, he can also plant one of the new gate's posts in the 'right' place, tho' he shouldn't prevent the existing door from opening.
0 -
Also a self-closing hinge on the new gate to prevent it "inadvertently" being left open by the neighbours to facilitate access ...0
-
Sadly, if thwarted by this, the next most obvious position for the IND to position a gateway is in that first panel to the metal gate's right.So, ultimately, Kem will be no better off.Fun, tho'... :-(0
-
mrschaucer said:Also a self-closing hinge on the new gate to prevent it "inadvertently" being left open by the neighbours to facilitate access ...
And you should see the size of the spring...
0 -
Jeepers_Creepers said:
That's worth saying, S62, but it's not the idea at all.
The RoW - as it stands - will remain unaffected by the new gate. The new gate's lock will be accessed from both sides, in an equal manner. In function, it'll be little different to what's currently there.
But, once the new gate is up, should the neighb then proceed with a design of build which has an outwards-opening door which will swing over Kem's land, they should twig that to enable their new door to be opened from the inside, they'll first need to find a way of unlocking the new gate, and that will require the unopenable door to first be opened; they will discover the meaning of Catch 22. An oxy of a door, if you prefer.
...
There's an existing gate. (I referred to it in the part of that post Mojisola didn't quote)
Which way does the existing gate open?
Whose land does the neighbour claim the existing gate is on?
Who could be claiming the existing gate is their property not KEMYST's?
What happens if KEMYST puts up a new gate on his land which stops the existing gate opening?
What I'm saying (because the BiB suggests the point was missed) is that there is a difference between exercising your right to put up a gate on your land, and exercising that right knowingly (or reasonably foreseeingly) in a manner which impedes the RoW.
You said yourself to do the gate before the conservatory is built, because otherwise it could "seen as 'retaliatory' or an attempt at restricting access".
I agree with you - but go further and said "KEMYST needs to be cautious here" because doing the same thing knowingly or foreseeingly could be seen as peremptory - which could be as bad as doing it as 'retaliatory' - if the end result is an impeded RoW.
KEMYST can't just put up a gate and go [innocent face] - it needs to be done carefully so the neighbour can't make a valid claim the RoW has been blocked.
0 -
Section62 said:Jeepers_Creepers said:
That's worth saying, S62, but it's not the idea at all.
The RoW - as it stands - will remain unaffected by the new gate. The new gate's lock will be accessed from both sides, in an equal manner. In function, it'll be little different to what's currently there.
But, once the new gate is up, should the neighb then proceed with a design of build which has an outwards-opening door which will swing over Kem's land, they should twig that to enable their new door to be opened from the inside, they'll first need to find a way of unlocking the new gate, and that will require the unopenable door to first be opened; they will discover the meaning of Catch 22. An oxy of a door, if you prefer.
...
There's an existing gate. (I referred to it in the part of that post Mojisola didn't quote)
Which way does the existing gate open?
Whose land does the neighbour claim the existing gate is on?
Who could be claiming the existing gate is their property not KEMYST's?
What happens if KEMYST puts up a new gate on his land which stops the existing gate opening?
What I'm saying (because the BiB suggests the point was missed) is that there is a difference between exercising your right to put up a gate on your land, and exercising that right knowingly (or reasonably foreseeingly) in a manner which impedes the RoW.
You said yourself to do the gate before the conservatory is built, because otherwise it could "seen as 'retaliatory' or an attempt at restricting access".
I agree with you - but go further and said "KEMYST needs to be cautious here" because doing the same thing knowingly or foreseeingly could be seen as peremptory - which could be as bad as doing it as 'retaliatory' - if the end result is an impeded RoW.
KEMYST can't just put up a gate and go [innocent face] - it needs to be done carefully so the neighbour can't make a valid claim the RoW has been blocked.Blimey.Kem can put a gate up. It won't in any way impede the RoW. It very possibly/hopefully will prevent the neighbour from opening any door which has yet to be fitted, but is designed to swing over/trespass onto Kem's land. Kem doesn't even have to suggest that's the reason for it - I did say it would be for 'screening off the neighb's construction'.The neighb will have a choice - and if it's to fit an outwardly-opening door that is designed to encroach and trespass over Kem's land, he's an idiot and will be stuffed.The neighb is the one at fault.There is next to zero chance in this or any other parallel universe of Kem being seen to be in the wrong. Because he's done nothing wrong. Unless you are planning to waterboard him to 'fess up to his malicious plan?'Pedantic' doesn't even begin...The existing gate opens into Kem's land. Kem thinks it's his, his neighb claims it's theirs. His neighb plans to remove it, I think even saying he'd cut away the posts. Since Kem has been informed of this, he is even more entitled to fit his own gate, completely on his own land, and which opens towards him, and with a lock. He doesn't want that end to be gateless.What the neighb chooses to do, is up to the neighb. You are not going to suggest that a ruling would be made that says Kem has to remove his gate so that his neighb can repeatedly trespass on to his land!1 -
Jeepers_Creepers said:Blimey.Kem can put a gate up. It won't in any way impede the RoW. It very possibly/hopefully will prevent the neighbour from opening any door which has yet to be fitted, but is designed to swing over/trespass onto Kem's land. Kem doesn't even have to suggest that's the reason for it - I did say it would be for 'screening off the neighb's construction'.The neighb will have a choice - and if it's to fit an outwardly-opening door that is designed to encroach and trespass over Kem's land, he's an idiot and will be stuffed.The neighb is the one at fault.There is next to zero chance in this or any other parallel universe of Kem being seen to be in the wrong. Because he's done nothing wrong. Unless you are planning to waterboard him to 'fess up to his malicious plan?'Pedantic' doesn't even begin...The existing gate opens into Kem's land. Kem thinks it's his, his neighb claims it's theirs. His neighb plans to remove it, I think even saying he'd cut away the posts. Since Kem has been informed of this, he is even more entitled to fit his own gate, completely on his own land, and which opens towards him, and with a lock. He doesn't want that end to be gateless.What the neighb chooses to do, is up to the neighb. You are not going to suggest that a ruling would be made that says Kem has to remove his gate so that his neighb can repeatedly trespass on to his land!
There's an existing gate that's been there who knows how long, which the neighbour currently plans to remove. But until it is removed the siting of KEMYST's new gate could obstruct it if KEMYST doesn't take care with the siting.
Is the neighbour entitled to keep the existing gate as it is? Possibly not. Is KEMYST allowed to just block it and prevent the RoW being used? Debatable. Something a court may well be asked to adjudicate.
The usual problem when you say "Pedantic" is you are seeing stuff in black and white when the reality is shades of grey. (grey like the render being applied to that grey concrete block retaining wall)
At no point have I said KEMYST cannot put up a new gate, just that it needs to be done with some care and consideration to avoid KEMYST putting himself in the wrong - as he might if he follows some of the bull-in-a-china-shop advice he's been given.
And there's no need for waterboarding - everything is laid out clearly and in detail above, right down to the specific of "And you should see the size of the spring...". Does it ever occur to you the 'other side' might use this forum too? So when giving advice online about anything 'legal' sometimes saying less is a lot better.
Just saying.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards