is my neighbour trespassing

GDB2222

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

Bendy_House said:

GDB2222 said:

I’m curious about why it matters so much that scary lady walks across worried's garden? Postie does it, and that’s fine with worried. Scary lady does it because it’s a shortcut. It’s a bit rude, I agree. Well, very rude, but it’s liveable with rudeness. 

Have you read the whole thread, GDB?

Based on what the OP has described, this isn't just a case of a lady walking across someone else's garden. It's a culmination of issues which should constitute nuisance if not actual harassment.

The OP has been a bit coy on detail, tho', such as what she's done about it so far. 

I understand that there's a previous history of bad behaviour here. But, this particular bit of bad behaviour is not too serious. It may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak, but on the whole it sounds like something that could be ignored. 

This particular bit of bad behaviour has been described by the OP as harassment, but it doesn't really seem like that. It's just somebody using a shortcut that they are not entitled to use. There's no deliberate harm to the OP's property as far as I can tell. 

Seems to be causing the OP alarm and distress so are you saying it's accidental trespassing by the neighbour?

It does seem to be upsetting the OP, but the question is why? The postman taking exactly the same route is not upsetting the OP, so I'm trying to understand whether Scary lady is actually doing anything specifically to upset the OP? 

As an example, we are on a corner here, and loads of people take a shortcut across our front garden, rather than walking a couple of yards further round the pavement. It's a bit thoughtless and rude of them,  but there's clearly no intention to harass us.  I could make a fool of myself shouting at them, I suppose.  

 

Are the same people dumping dog muck and using your fence as a washing line? There is clearly a course of conduct here. 

The OP's neighbour clearly is a right piece of work, but the police have already been involved in connection with the main issues.

There's a difference between thoughtlessness and harassment, and the particular act of walking through the OP's front garden probably does not meet the definition in the act of "which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other" if others doing the same are tolerated. 

To put it more plainly, if it's okay for postie to do it, it's hard to see why scary lady doing the same is harassment. 

DanDare999

GDB2222 said:

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

Bendy_House said:

GDB2222 said:

I’m curious about why it matters so much that scary lady walks across worried's garden? Postie does it, and that’s fine with worried. Scary lady does it because it’s a shortcut. It’s a bit rude, I agree. Well, very rude, but it’s liveable with rudeness. 

Have you read the whole thread, GDB?

Based on what the OP has described, this isn't just a case of a lady walking across someone else's garden. It's a culmination of issues which should constitute nuisance if not actual harassment.

The OP has been a bit coy on detail, tho', such as what she's done about it so far. 

I understand that there's a previous history of bad behaviour here. But, this particular bit of bad behaviour is not too serious. It may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak, but on the whole it sounds like something that could be ignored. 

This particular bit of bad behaviour has been described by the OP as harassment, but it doesn't really seem like that. It's just somebody using a shortcut that they are not entitled to use. There's no deliberate harm to the OP's property as far as I can tell. 

Seems to be causing the OP alarm and distress so are you saying it's accidental trespassing by the neighbour?

It does seem to be upsetting the OP, but the question is why? The postman taking exactly the same route is not upsetting the OP, so I'm trying to understand whether Scary lady is actually doing anything specifically to upset the OP? 

As an example, we are on a corner here, and loads of people take a shortcut across our front garden, rather than walking a couple of yards further round the pavement. It's a bit thoughtless and rude of them,  but there's clearly no intention to harass us.  I could make a fool of myself shouting at them, I suppose.  

 

Are the same people dumping dog muck and using your fence as a washing line? There is clearly a course of conduct here. 

The OP's neighbour clearly is a right piece of work, but the police have already been involved in connection with the main issues.

There's a difference between thoughtlessness and harassment, and the particular act of walking through the OP's front garden probably does not meet the definition in the act of "which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other" if others doing the same are tolerated. 

To put it more plainly, if it's okay for postie to do it, it's hard to see why scary lady doing the same is harassment. 

Postie isn't forming a course of conduct, can you see that?

Bendy_House

Postie is using the OP's gate to gain access to the OP's door. The neighb is not.

The neighb's actions are presumptuous at best. YOU wouldn't do this without permission, and nor would I.

And neither of us would CONTINUE to do this if we were involved in a dispute/fall-out. Unless...

If the OP is happy with the postie taking the shorter subsequent route to her neighb's door, that's the OP's call.

I can only go by what we are being told, but if the content is largely true, then there is understandably no love lost either way. Both parties know this. Therefore, one with any self-awarenes would know that to trespass on the land of the person with whom you are engaged in a dispute/ are on non- friendly terms with, would be a provocative act, and not likely to be received kindly.

It is NOT enough to claim in mitigation (if she tried to), "Oh, I thought she'd be ok with it!", as in civil cases (and criminal) there is a level of - what's it called? - awareness/ appreciation/ duty of care that folk SHOULD be demonstrating to others. 

Considering what has seemingly gone on between these two, on 'balance of probabilities', I'd suggest that this lady knows exactly what she is doing, and that's why she's doing it.

Worried has choices; she puts up a fence, which will cost her money, or she tells this lady to stop, giving the reasons why. But she also needs to be ready to act if it continues. 

If she can prove that she informed the lady to stop, and if she can demonstrate with some confidence all/most/much of the history, then the LA should, I think, rightly conclude that this behaviour is deliberate and designed to harass/ cause a nuisance. But they might also insist Worried takes the first step and put up a fence.

k3lvc

6 pages in and still no-one knows what the tenure of the OP's property is and whether the neighbour has legal (albeit unwanted by the OP) access rights 

kdotdotdotdot

Brie said:

I'd be thinking about putting in a fence with a lot of very thorny bushes along it (look for compassion rose - thorns up to an inch long, grows like anything, 12 foot spread from one plant and the most beautiful fragrant blooms possible from April to November.)

I'd second this suggestion.  You can grow fences much more affordably than actual fencing, and if that fence just happens to be thorny, then hey, that's life!

Rose bushes are a great idea.  If you've got the sunshine, then you can also benefit by growing raspberries and gooseberries in large pots (I've got mine in £10 plastic pots).  

As long as you legally know where your land is, you can grow whatever you like on it*.

*within reason of course.  Avoid Japanese knotweed and other illegal plants.

Bendy_House

kdotdotdotdot said:

Brie said:

I'd be thinking about putting in a fence with a lot of very thorny bushes along it (look for compassion rose - thorns up to an inch long, grows like anything, 12 foot spread from one plant and the most beautiful fragrant blooms possible from April to November.)

I'd second this suggestion.  You can grow fences much more affordably than actual fencing, and if that fence just happens to be thorny, then hey, that's life!

Rose bushes are a great idea.  If you've got the sunshine, then you can also benefit by growing raspberries and gooseberries in large pots (I've got mine in £10 plastic pots).  

As long as you legally know where your land is, you can grow whatever you like on it*.

*within reason of course.  Avoid Japanese knotweed and other illegal plants.

That's a possible answer, but if this neighb isn't actually TOLD to stop crossing over Worried's land, it's going to take quite some time before that bush-fence does its job. And a good chance it never will, as this neighb will be tramping a path through it.

And, should it actually end up successful, the next job will be to keep it tamed, when the neighbour allows their side to grow out of control.

If Worried is going to put up a fence, and is worried about the cost, then a 3' picket fence will do. Anyone who steps over a physical fence really is taking the piddle.

GDB2222

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

DanDare999 said:

GDB2222 said:

Bendy_House said:

GDB2222 said:

I’m curious about why it matters so much that scary lady walks across worried's garden? Postie does it, and that’s fine with worried. Scary lady does it because it’s a shortcut. It’s a bit rude, I agree. Well, very rude, but it’s liveable with rudeness. 

Have you read the whole thread, GDB?

Based on what the OP has described, this isn't just a case of a lady walking across someone else's garden. It's a culmination of issues which should constitute nuisance if not actual harassment.

The OP has been a bit coy on detail, tho', such as what she's done about it so far. 

I understand that there's a previous history of bad behaviour here. But, this particular bit of bad behaviour is not too serious. It may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak, but on the whole it sounds like something that could be ignored. 

This particular bit of bad behaviour has been described by the OP as harassment, but it doesn't really seem like that. It's just somebody using a shortcut that they are not entitled to use. There's no deliberate harm to the OP's property as far as I can tell. 

Seems to be causing the OP alarm and distress so are you saying it's accidental trespassing by the neighbour?

It does seem to be upsetting the OP, but the question is why? The postman taking exactly the same route is not upsetting the OP, so I'm trying to understand whether Scary lady is actually doing anything specifically to upset the OP? 

As an example, we are on a corner here, and loads of people take a shortcut across our front garden, rather than walking a couple of yards further round the pavement. It's a bit thoughtless and rude of them,  but there's clearly no intention to harass us.  I could make a fool of myself shouting at them, I suppose.  

 

Are the same people dumping dog muck and using your fence as a washing line? There is clearly a course of conduct here. 

The OP's neighbour clearly is a right piece of work, but the police have already been involved in connection with the main issues.

There's a difference between thoughtlessness and harassment, and the particular act of walking through the OP's front garden probably does not meet the definition in the act of "which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other" if others doing the same are tolerated. 

To put it more plainly, if it's okay for postie to do it, it's hard to see why scary lady doing the same is harassment. 

Postie isn't forming a course of conduct, can you see that?

You are coming close to saying that Scary lady breathing is part of a course of conduct that amounts to harassment. 

Bendy_House

GDB, didn't the OP say that Scary was doing stuff like slamming her gate, and other very 'obvious' provocative behaviour? (Can't bear going through the thread again...)

Even if not, both sides know there's a serious issue between them. For one party to cross over someone else's property with this knowledge says pretty much everything, I think.

BUT, I WOULD let this neighb know they do NOT have permission. And explain why. All you are doing is looking impartially at the facts of the situation, and then stating them. Unemotively.

"Due to your behaviour and previous incidences, I am making it clear to you that you are not welcome on my property, and that includes using my gate and garden to access yours. Do you understand what I'm saying?" If said in the right manner, that is simply 'assertive' and no more.

What can the neighbour do?! They ain't going to hit you! They might rant and cuss. Cool - LA Cop time.

k3lvc

Bendy_House said:

BUT, I WOULD let this neighb know they do NOT have permission. And explain why. All you are doing is looking impartially at the facts of the situation, and then stating them. Unemotively.

"Due to your behaviour and previous incidences, I am making it clear to you that you are not welcome on my property, and that includes using my gate and garden to access yours. Do you understand what I'm saying?" If said in the right manner, that is simply 'assertive' and no more.

What can the neighbour do?! They ain't going to hit you! They might rant and cuss. Cool - LA Cop time.

But until the OP returns and shares the status of the property no-one knows and it's just as likely to be a situation that they don't want neighbour there rather than neighbour not being allowed to be there.

From previous posts it's clear that there are some communal garden areas and both OP and neighbour are tenants