Trees on our side of the fence..

MrBounce

Hi

I have recently purchased a house which has some trees on the property. We are looking to have some building works done, and the trees may need to come down.

They have been surveyed and are of low quality and I have been told there would be no issue to take them down, as they add no real value.

The neighbouring property has a conservatory which is next to the tree, and they have a fence which is in line with the conservatory (this has been there since at least 2008 according to google earth).

The trees are on my side of the fence. The previous owners sold part of the rear garden 5/6 years ago, and part of the planning application they were plotted within my boundary, which is how they look when you physically see the..The previous owners also tell me they are ours, however the neighbour says they are common.

If the neighbour says they are common, however based on what the sellers told us and based on it being on our side of the fence, and the planning application for the house on the rear garden shows they are within our boundary, can we safely assume they are ours?

There is nothing in the deeds about trees, and there are no Ts on the boundary etc.

Dustyevsky

You can't safely assume anything about boundaries, but it seems the sycamores have been heavily cut back before. If they represent the true boundary, the sky didn't fall in then!

You say that's the neighbour's fence, and if it is, it was erected from your side. If the neighbour is saying the trees represent the true boundary, without immovable reference points, that might be hard for them to prove.This is essentially about where the boundary lies, and we can't tell you that from a couple of photos.Boundary disputes can become very expensive.

There's what looks like an old post in picture 2, so are you sure the current fence is the one from 2008? It sounds to me as if the neighbour doesn't want you building, or maybe they want the trees to shade their conservatory in summer. Either way, this may be a case of deciding how far they will go to claim shared ownership of the trees, which, as you say, are of no great wildlife value and can be a damn menace when large. They have certainly left their 'care and maintenance' to you. My guess is not far, but don't expect a Christmas card!

ThisIsWeird

MrBounce said:

They have been surveyed and are of low quality and I have been told there would be no issue to take them down, as they add no real value.

The neighbouring property has a conservatory which is next to the tree, and they have a fence which is in line with the conservatory (this has been there since at least 2008 according to google earth).

The trees are on my side of the fence. The previous owners sold part of the rear garden 5/6 years ago, and part of the planning application they were plotted within my boundary, which is how they look when you physically see the..The previous owners also tell me they are ours, however the neighbour says they are common.

If the neighbour says they are common, however...can we safely assume they are ours?

There is nothing in the deeds about trees,

First thing - try and ascertain, as accurately as you can, where the true boundary lies.

The neighbouring house has a connie, and the fence in the photos is 'in line' with this connie? Cool. What is the connie 'in line' with - the side wall of the house? And where does the boundary lie in relation to their house's side wall?

Any chance of posting an anonymised photo of your deeds plan?

Meanwhile, in any conversation, nice and polite and calm, but also matter-of-fact. "These trees are 'common'? What do you mean by that? Oh, they are owned jointly, are they? Blimey, that's unusual! Could you show me where it says this? Seriously, can you provide any evidence of this common agreement? I didn't think so. See that sapling? I recommend you coat it with vaseline, because I'm gonna..." I paraphrase.

In essence, tho', (a) find out where the true boundary lies. And (b) challenge them - nicely - for the evidence of this commonality.

Then cut them down. Followed by the trees.

(But not if they're on their land...)

MrBounce

Please see below... The yellow line is the conservatory which doesn't show...

The other one is the plan used for planning some years back for a house to be built at the bottom of the garden by the previous owners...

ThisIsWeird

That's a funny looking Connie... I'm guessing it doesn't actually stick out the side of their house, as your yellow crayon suggests, but comes out level with it? Could you post the Google pic too?

Ok, what these plans 'suggest' very strongly is that the correct boundary does not touch their property (like you said their fence does the connie) but passes between your two properties at a point roughly twice to three times as far from your garage as their house.

Eg, if the distance from their end house wall to your garage is, say, 2 metres, then the shown boundary (shown in dot-dash) would be roughly 600mm from their house wall, and about 1400mm from your garage. 'Roughly'.

The second plan is also very interesting as it does show the position of some actual trees, and very accurately. Do the 4 trees shown match what you have in reality? If so, that would add to the evidence that these trees are fully within your land. Ergo, they are yours. 

So, distance between their house wall and your garage? Location of the fence in relation to the plan? And are these 4 trees identifiable?

MrBounce

ThisIsWeird said:

That's a funny looking Connie... I'm guessing it doesn't actually stick out the side of their house, as your yellow crayon suggests, but comes out level with it? Could you post the Google pic too?

Ok, what these plans 'suggest' very strongly is that the correct boundary does not touch their property (like you said their fence does the connie) but passes between your two properties at a point roughly twice to three times as far from your garage as their house.

Eg, if the distance from their end house wall to your garage is, say, 2 metres, then the shown boundary (shown in dot-dash) would be roughly 600mm from their house wall, and about 1400mm from your garage. 'Roughly'.

The second plan is also very interesting as it does show the position of some actual trees, and very accurately. Do the 4 trees shown match what you have in reality? If so, that would add to the evidence that these trees are fully within your land. Ergo, they are yours. 

So, distance between their house wall and your garage? Location of the fence in relation to the plan? And are these 4 trees identifiable?

It does stick out to the side slightly, which is under wall you can see in the photo. The original wall of the house is a metre or so away from their fence..

I can't get a clear enough Google pic as all the trees cover lot.. 

MrBounce

Conservatory wall is lighter brick... Existing house wall is more red.. 

ThisIsWeird

Ok, I think I can see what you mean. Their connie comes out, seemingly to the boundary line, and the boundary fence stops and then starts again at either end of the connie wall? So, their connie wall is effectively 'the boundary'? (Which may mean that their roof and D/P slightly overhang your property, but we're not going to go into measuring 'inches' here... :-) )

Looking at the bottom plan you've included, which appears to be more precise, which elements on that plan can you relate to on the ground?

1) Is the dot-dash line the correct boundary? (Surely yes). Does the wooden fence run - as best you can ascertain - along that boundary line? All the way to the road? And all the way down to the bottom of your gardens?

2) Is the end wall of their house ~1m away from that boundary, and fence?

3) Does their connie wall run on that boundary line?

4) Is your garage wall around 2.5m from that boundary line and fence?

If lots of yeses, then I think you can be pretty secure in calling that the correct boundary between your properties.

Where do the trees lie in relation to that boundary? I'm assuming they are as shown in an earlier pic - very clearly on your side? If so, they are yours.

The actual trees which are indicated on that plan, with their canopies overhanging the neighbour's house, can you ID these specific trees? Are any of them the ones that were seemingly cut down - copsed - close to the ground, with the new shoots being the only thing now present?

Anyhoo, as far as I can see - and that is not with a pro eye - the evidence for these being your trees is pretty conclusive. If your neighbour tries to claim them as shared or common or even theirs, they need to provide equal proof.

 

Brie

"The previous owners also tell me they are ours, however the neighbour says they are common."

When the neighbour says they are common does that mean they are saying you are not allowed to cut them without their permission??  I can't see how they could be "owned" by both properties if they are definitely on one side of the boundary.  Is there any mileage in noting that the greenhouse may be better in some way without so much shade?? 

Dustyevsky

Brie said:

  Is there any mileage in noting that the greenhouse may be better in some way without so much shade?? 

It's a conservatory, and in the current period of good weather, probably the last thing that's wanted is a removal of shade!

It's down to evidence IMO, and as the neighbour doesn't seem to have any, now is the time to ask them for it.

MrBounce

ThisIsWeird said:

Ok, I think I can see what you mean. Their connie comes out, seemingly to the boundary line, and the boundary fence stops and then starts again at either end of the connie wall? So, their connie wall is effectively 'the boundary'? (Which may mean that their roof and D/P slightly overhang your property, but we're not going to go into measuring 'inches' here... :-) )

Looking at the bottom plan you've included, which appears to be more precise, which elements on that plan can you relate to on the ground?

1) Is the dot-dash line the correct boundary? (Surely yes). Does the wooden fence run - as best you can ascertain - along that boundary line? All the way to the road? And all the way down to the bottom of your gardens?

2) Is the end wall of their house ~1m away from that boundary, and fence?

3) Does their connie wall run on that boundary line?

4) Is your garage wall around 2.5m from that boundary line and fence?

If lots of yeses, then I think you can be pretty secure in calling that the correct boundary between your properties.

Where do the trees lie in relation to that boundary? I'm assuming they are as shown in an earlier pic - very clearly on your side? If so, they are yours.

The actual trees which are indicated on that plan, with their canopies overhanging the neighbour's house, can you ID these specific trees? Are any of them the ones that were seemingly cut down - copsed - close to the ground, with the new shoots being the only thing now present?

Anyhoo, as far as I can see - and that is not with a pro eye - the evidence for these being your trees is pretty conclusive. If your neighbour tries to claim them as shared or common or even theirs, they need to provide equal proof.

 

1) Yes I think so
2) Approx 1m yes
3) In my opinion yes
4) Our garage is probably 1.5m from boundary - not measured.

The trees on the plan are the existing trees I believe.