Confused about whether is a boundary wall or nothing of the sort, please help!

Jellynailer

Misthios said:

Thanks everyone.  I appreciate all views and assistance. I didn't take anything in the wrong way.  I ll have updates from Monday and I ll get back to you.
Unfortunately, the relations with the neighbours have soured a lot and there's no way we can talk. I have documented a lot of information in emails and texts and I ll contact my Legal Advice cover from Monday. I ll keep you posted. Have a great weekend ahead.

Thank you for your update.  When you do post again, please can you say whether/what the Planning Dept. have said about the raised bed and whether you have consulted Highways about the hedge on your land and the pavement.

Additionally, noting that No 17 a) is Victorian (then extended in 2006) and b) originally owned the land on which the 5 properties were built, there would have been negotiations between the developer and No 17 prior to completing the build in 1993.  If you have not checked on Land Registry for the current No 17 deeds, can I suggest you do so because the title may include an amendment in reference to the strip.  You could also check whether the developer registered any update title. 

Section62

Jellynailer said:

Misthios said:

Thanks everyone.  I appreciate all views and assistance. I didn't take anything in the wrong way.  I ll have updates from Monday and I ll get back to you.
Unfortunately, the relations with the neighbours have soured a lot and there's no way we can talk. I have documented a lot of information in emails and texts and I ll contact my Legal Advice cover from Monday. I ll keep you posted. Have a great weekend ahead.

Thank you for your update.  When you do post again, please can you say whether/what the Planning Dept. have said about the raised bed and whether you have consulted Highways about the hedge on your land and the pavement.

OP, personally I would drop the idea of contacting the highways department about the hedge.  Here's why:

1) As someone who has worked for a highways authority and been personally responsible for deciding whether or not to issue S154 notices, I don't think it is sufficiently clear that the neighbour's hedge is a problem.  In your photo the hedge is neatly trimmed and well maintained.  It is unclear where the highway boundary is, and whether any part of the hedge is growing over the highway.  If it is growing over the highway then the amount seems to be minimal and in considering how to deal with this the de minimis test would have to be applied.

Action cannot be taken just because part of the hedge overhangs the highway - for it to be actionable the overhang has to "...endanger or obstruct the passage of vehicles or pedestrians [or horse riders]...".  If this was a busy through road then there might be a case to informally ask the owner to trim the hedge back futher, but as Chapel Lane is a short no-through road and the footway ends where the hedge is anyway, arguing that the hedge obstructs the highway and endangers or obstructs the passage of vehicles or pedestrians is really a bit of a non-starter.  If it is dangerous to walk past the hedge then it is equally dangerous to walk past your house (due to the lack of footway there).

2) The hedge [allegedly] on your land is a private matter and nothing to do with the highways authority. If you raise it with them the highway authority should tell you that, and not get involved.  However, there is a risk the highways officer involved does mention this to your neighbour, which could make the next point more of an issue.

3) If you wish to ultimately resolve the dispute with your neighbour and avoid an expensive legal case you will both need to find a way of compromising and managing to get on with each other, even if you aren't friends.  You will both need to dial down the hostility.  Reporting the neighbour's hedge to the highway authority will probably be perceived as a hostile act by the neighbour - whether or not the highways officer identifies you as the complainant, the neighbour is going to assume it was you that complained. And if you ask highways to get involved in relation to your own land then the neighbour would have proof it was you that reported them.

Focus on the issue of the ground level/raised bed next to your house - don't get distracted by side issues.

Jellynailer said:

Additionally, noting that No 17 a) is Victorian (then extended in 2006) and b) originally owned the land on which the 5 properties were built, there would have been negotiations between the developer and No 17 prior to completing the build in 1993.  If you have not checked on Land Registry for the current No 17 deeds, can I suggest you do so because the title may include an amendment in reference to the strip.  You could also check whether the developer registered any update title.

For clarity - I speculated that the land the OP's property is built on was once in the same ownership as number 17 (based on old OS mapping) but that is not the same thing as saying number 17 owned the land.  Nor is there any evidence so far that number 17 owned the land in the 1990's, so whether or not there were 'negotiations' between the developer and the owner of number 17 is pure conjecture.

That said, checking the deeds for number 17 is a good idea and would be a standard part of the research needed to work out rights and responsibilities along the common boundary.  This was something that needed doing before even starting to think about writing a letter before action.