New Build Bin Drama

UnderOffer

Do your other 2 neighbours use this slope for their bins? Aren’t they all being inconvenienced? 

Titus_Wadd

MeteredOut said:

And this may sound cynical, but rather than "I can't take my bins out" a "My wheelchair bound friend can't visit me" story is likely to get more traction with both the council and the builder, and perhaps even the local press...

I wish I could agree.  We have had our wheelchair access blocked for 4 years but the Police/Council haven't yet identified (1) a problem or (2) a remedy.  Any superficial statutory duties are not necessarily enforced as there are no bodies that will force them to do it.  eg The Local Government Ombudsman can only make suggestions.  

We have had two LGO complaints upheld and even though the house is subject to planning conditions and building regs requiring it to be built with wheelchair width access, the council is ham-stringed by their legal department refusing to take legal action to enforce any breaches.  The word "expedient" is their favourite reason to avoid actual discussion with those impacted by their decision. 

Optional back-story: The police and council seem confused by the privately owned estate road even though it is a spur off a private road which is a public right of way.  In spite of the County Council defining our estate road as a "road" for Public Law and Road Traffic Act purposes, the wilful blocking of our front path to the only wheelchair-width door is something they don't know how to remedy, so they blame the private ownership as the hurdle they cannot deal with.  

We have an abandoned car blocking half our drive and half of the front path to the wider door for 4 years solid.  

Even though there is provision under the refuse disposal act (sorry can't remember the exact act name and date details), provides councils and police powers to remove a car "that appears abandoned" from a "road" including privately owned roads, without notice to the landowner.  The local council and police still refuse to act even though the DVLA advised me that the council has a statutory duty to remove the vehicle.  Similarly we await an answer from the LPA regarding the enforcement of planning permission condition breaches that require the turning head (where the car has rendered it useless for 4 years) and building regs that require the wheelchair-access door to be maintained going forward.  Enforcement was sanctioned at a Planning Committee meeting 12 months ago.

What I'm trying to say is that having info and presenting it to the relevant authority doesn't mean they will actually do something.  Councils and Police are strapped for resources but they could still choose to act with more compassion.  Neighbour problems have been reported to Env Health, ASB case worker, Planning and the police for 5 years, with incidents usually reported within 24 hours.  The council then takes >6 months to investigate and then say the incident has "timed out".  They repeatedly rely on the "private road" excuse.  The two LGO decisions are a pyrrhic victory followed by apology letter promising more timely responses yada yada!  There has been no improvement.

The police equally fall over their own perception of potential civil dispute (because the road is privately owned).  It acts as a catch-all defense to any misdemeanor perpetrated against us, including physical assaults and criminal damage.  Our abusers know this and tell any PC there is a boundary dispute when asked about destroying garden items or grabbing me by the arm shouting "Move! Or you will get hurt!" (I was standing on my front lawn - all captured by CCTV with sound).  The incidents were closed and we were advised to remove any "valuable items" from the front garden and to keep out of their way!

Victim support advised reporting incidents as Disability Hate Crimes where we have recordings of insulting references to my physical limitations; I didn't really want to take this route, but when I have, the incident is down-graded and closed because they don't understand how it feels to be unable to leave my home without an escort.  That when exit by car is blocked for days "ask them to move" is just not a safe option.  The police say that I am legally entitled to move obstacles put in my way, but that they cannot help further just because I physically am unable to do so!

We have had sympathetic noises from our MP, several councillors, the Police and Crime Commissioner, Victim Support and ASB Help.  Our next effort involves turning to disability charities for support or advice; perhaps the OP could try this?  Despite having a visible disability, it was three years before the council did a risk assessment of me.  When raising the wheelchair access it was pointed out to me that I don't use a wheelchair!  It's a sad indictment that police and council hit me with !!!!!! like this when I'm pleading for help.

Gentoo365

Isn't there some sort of 'easement' type rule that could be used in this case. i.e. you require to pass over the neighbours property to exit yours (via the ramp)?

RHemmings

Gentoo365 said:

Isn't there some sort of 'easement' type rule that could be used in this case. i.e. you require to pass over the neighbours property to exit yours (via the ramp)?

It's possible to have an easement of necessity, where it can be argued that an easement should exist because a person needs it. However, the only examples of this I've seen myself (not exhaustive search by any means) are for properties that are landlocked with no access to roads. The situation in this thread is much less clear - are there alternatives to using the piece of land in dispute? 

user1977

If the OP wants advice on what the builders ought to have built, or what easements apply, they should be revisiting whatever they were told by their solicitors when they bought.

BarelySentientAI

RHemmings said:

Gentoo365 said:

Isn't there some sort of 'easement' type rule that could be used in this case. i.e. you require to pass over the neighbours property to exit yours (via the ramp)?

It's possible to have an easement of necessity, where it can be argued that an easement should exist because a person needs it. However, the only examples of this I've seen myself (not exhaustive search by any means) are for properties that are landlocked with no access to roads. The situation in this thread is much less clear - are there alternatives to using the piece of land in dispute? 

The "few feet of sloping grass verge" to the car park.  It doesn't need to be paved to be an access route.

RHemmings

BarelySentientAI said:

RHemmings said:

Gentoo365 said:

Isn't there some sort of 'easement' type rule that could be used in this case. i.e. you require to pass over the neighbours property to exit yours (via the ramp)?

It's possible to have an easement of necessity, where it can be argued that an easement should exist because a person needs it. However, the only examples of this I've seen myself (not exhaustive search by any means) are for properties that are landlocked with no access to roads. The situation in this thread is much less clear - are there alternatives to using the piece of land in dispute? 

The "few feet of sloping grass verge" to the car park.  It doesn't need to be paved to be an access route.

Thanks. But, this is what I mean by the situation being clear. Would, for example, that be considered a safe access route in all weathers? For people who are disabled? 

This site suggests 'The High Court has held that implied easements of necessity may be granted even if another means of access is available.', but the actual details are behind a paywall. And, the page is dated 2004, 20 years ago. https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/7-102-8877

My point in my post is that I don't think there is a strong case for an easement of necessity. Both because of possible/argueable alternatiives and because it doesn't fit the classic case for such an easement. 

ThorOdinson

OP, do you have legal cover on your home insurance?