Builder able to cross my land?

Schwarzwald

can you block the road and thereby force a discussion around it?

ThisIsWeird

davemorton said:

Bookworm105 said:

as explained on the Land registry website, it is the wording in your deeds that matters when it comes to "roads" shown within the red line on the title plan denoting what you own

the words will say if there is an implied right of access across a "private" road or not, and as others advise, see what the deeds for the bit of land say about right of access to it

if the builder has obtained planning permission then it is inconceivable that the council would have granted development of a land locked site since they would know the road is not adopted.
Were you not aware of the planning application at the time, did you not object then?

Yes, I was aware, and did object, but that was when they were proposing using a different entrance.  The online option of objecting closed a couple of months ago, and now they have changed the access route.  
The following is all I can see on my deeds.....

(1) That the Purchaser will keep the Vendors

effectually indemnified against all claims by the

tenants for compensation under the Agricultural

Holdings Act 1948 or otherwise in respect of the

land hereby conveyed

(2) That the Purchaser will forthwith at his own

expense and to the satisfaction of the agent for the

time being of the Vendors properly fence off the

land hereby conveyed from the adjoining lands of

the Vendors and provide all necessary entrances

and gates and will thereafter keep the said fences

entrances and gates in good and substantial repair

(3) That the Purchaser will at his own expense

repair and make good any damage done by building

or other operations on the land hereby conveyed to

field drains sewers or water pipes lying in or under

the land hereby conveyed but used in connection

with other lands of the Vendors

(4) That the Purchaser will at his own expense

execute and do all such works and things as any

competent authority may lawfully require the

purchaser of the Vendors to execute or do on or in

connection with the land hereby conveyed or the

whole of the roads or streets adjoining or abutting

thereon or the sewers used in connection therwith

and will keep the Vendors fully and effectually

indemnified from and against all liability in respect

of any such requirements notwithstanding that

such roads or streets and sewers abut or adjoin any

property belonging to the Vendors

(5) That no part of the land hereby conveyed or of

any building already standing or hereafter erected

thereon shall be used for any purpose other than a

private dwellinghouse and that no window or door

thereof shall open out over the adjoining lands of

the Vendors

(6) The Purchaser will leave open and unbuilt that

part of the land hereby conveyed which is coloured

blue on te said plan and will not build thereon

without the previous written permission of the

Vendors or their Agent. Such written permission

will not be unreasonably refused, but the Purchaser

will pay in addition to the purchase price herein

mentioned an additional sum of Four hundred

pounds for each house built on the said piece of

land coloured blue for which written permission to

build is given by the Vendors.

Any chance of a copy of the deeds map, too, please? And do any other houses use this road, or is it just you?

Bookworm105

Schwarzwald said:

can you block the road and thereby force a discussion around it?

not if the other party has a right of way ("easement") over it 

Schwarzwald

Bookworm105 said:

Schwarzwald said:

can you block the road and thereby force a discussion around it?

not if the other party has a right of way ("easement") over it 

i hear that, but 2-3 foldign parkign posts dont cost the world, once installed forces them to provide "proof" of such "easement", if they can produce it, takes 3min to allow access, if they can't, they cannot cross.

if someone has a right of way, i think the burden of (positive) proof is on them, not the owner to proof that such does not exist (negative).

Section62

Schwarzwald said:

Bookworm105 said:

Schwarzwald said:

can you block the road and thereby force a discussion around it?

not if the other party has a right of way ("easement") over it 

i hear that, but 2-3 foldign parkign posts dont cost the world, once installed forces them to provide "proof" of such "easement", if they can produce it, takes 3min to allow access, if they can't, they cannot cross.

if someone has a right of way, i think the burden of (positive) proof is on them, not the owner to proof that such does not exist (negative).

In the words of Sir Humphrey, that would be a brave decision.

If the person does have right of way then your interference with it could cost you.  Not all rights of way are documented, so not easily proved in the way you'd be demanding.

And someone taking preemptive action - like blocking the RoW with bollards - without discussion/negotiation beforehand is not going to endear them to any court asked to resolve the situation.

If the developer is prevented from progressing their development because you've unlawfully stopped them using their RoW then don't be surprised if they come after you for compensation for their losses.

silvercar

on the on the other hand, this ‘ransom strip’ could be worth a fortune.

GDB2222

silvercar said:

on the on the other hand, this ‘ransom strip’ could be worth a fortune.

In which case, the OP would be well advised to get professional advice. 

pinkshoes

silvercar said:

on the on the other hand, this ‘ransom strip’ could be worth a fortune.

This was my thinking.

If the developer wants to build and NEEDS access via the OPs land then the OP is in a very good position to negotiate.

It's not just a right of way to build though. I'm assuming the houses built will constantly need to drive across this land.

The OP should be looking for quote a sizeable chunk of the profit in return for a right of way.

RHemmings

Personally I think this thread needs more information from the OP. Not enough information to identify where they live, of course. 

The original plans had different access for the new property(ies) to be built on the land. But, now, the access is through the road. So, is the original access still a feasible alternate route? 

How did the change happen? I find it difficult to believe that the plans on which planning permission are based could have changed that much without a cycle allowing people to object. But, it seems that the time window for objections (however it happened) has closed.

A hand-drawn and scanned map of the situation (so as to not allow identification of the location) would help a lot. 

The OP's bargaining position will depend entirely on whether the new property(ies) already have a right/easement to use the road, or not. I don't see that there is anything in this thread that confirms or disconfirms that. It seems likely that the developer will have taken legal advice, and this may have influenced their decision to change the plans to use the road owned by the OP. 

bouicca21

Much more information needed about the status of the road.  Round my way many of the roads are still owned by the family who originally sold off the land for development but they are nevertheless public highways.  The family made sure they would have  no obligation to repair or maintain the roads, so the fact that technically they still own the roads confers no rights whatsoever.