My ongoing boundary dispute ordeal/odyssey (advice sought)

ThisIsWeird

Section62 said:

Hence my solution on page 1 of the thread (the one you said "Nice" about).

Keep it simple.  Most of the last 10 pages has been about making the situation more complicated and harder to resolve.

That 'studs' solution was about marking out the actual, known, 'boundary', not the OP's RoW, which is why I went on, after 'nice', to ask (from someone whose opinion I almost always respect); "Any mileage in suggesting that the OP suggest that the neighbours also install their own parallel demarcation studs - perhaps in a nice blue colour - to indicate the boundary of their land that the OP is entitled to access?"

Because I can see that as being the issue the neighbour will go on to 'push', if allowed to, moving forwards.

And, before that Page 1 reply of yours, I said; "If you are going to consider 'letting it go', then at least understand that your rights of way over that strip remain the same, so do continue to use it as if it were the old path. If you aren't currently doing this, then really you should on occasion, because these folk need to realise the full ongoing consequences of what they've done. I'd love to see them try and stop you from going down that side of their resin drive!

And, without any markings, where the RoW meets their land is now undefined on the ground, so you cannot be held responsible should you go 'over' it."

Which I stand by.

"Most of the last 10 pages has been about making the situation more complicated and harder to resolve."? I honestly do not believe you mean this.

Section62

ThisIsWeird said:

Section62 said:

Hence my solution on page 1 of the thread (the one you said "Nice" about).

Keep it simple.  Most of the last 10 pages has been about making the situation more complicated and harder to resolve.

That 'studs' solution was about marking out the actual, known, 'boundary', not the OP's RoW, which is why I went on, after 'nice', to ask (from someone whose opinion I almost always respect); "Any mileage in suggesting that the OP suggest that the neighbours also install their own parallel demarcation studs - perhaps in a nice blue colour - to indicate the boundary of their land that the OP is entitled to access?"

Because I can see that as being the issue the neighbour will go on to 'push', if allowed to, moving forwards.

And, before that Page 1 reply of yours, I said; "If you are going to consider 'letting it go', then at least understand that your rights of way over that strip remain the same, so do continue to use it as if it were the old path. If you aren't currently doing this, then really you should on occasion, because these folk need to realise the full ongoing consequences of what they've done. I'd love to see them try and stop you from going down that side of their resin drive!

And, without any markings, where the RoW meets their land is now undefined on the ground, so you cannot be held responsible should you go 'over' it."

Which I stand by.

"Most of the last 10 pages has been about making the situation more complicated and harder to resolve."? I honestly do not believe you mean this.

I absolutely do mean it.

The OP's problem today is that the boundary isn't marked.  Mark the boundary and that problem is solved.

At some point in the future the neighbour might obstruct the RoW, or tell the OP they can't use it.  That is a future problem, which may never happen.  If it does, then the OP will have their LP to rely on.

Most of the last 10 pages has been about solving that future problem, not the today problem.  Thus making the situation more complicated and harder to resolve.

The closest the OP has come to identifying an existing issue with the RoW was that the neighbour once parked right up to it and got out of their vehicle onto the RoW strip.  There is nothing legally preventing them accessing or egressing their vehicle from/to the RoW strip.  That is a non-issue from a legal point of view. So long as the vehicle is not obstructing the RoW there is nothing wrong.

ThisIsWeird

'Trespass with criminal property damage'? Ok, a light version, but still.

Or, 'neighbour taking the mick'?

GDB2222

You don’t need to mark it with studs on the newly installed resin. A document from the op to the neighbour saying the boundary is X cms from the edge of the resin would serve exactly the same purpose. It the neighbour doesn’t agree, and thinks all the resined area belongs to him, then he will just rip the studs out. 

Section62

ThisIsWeird said:

'Trespass with criminal property damage'? Ok, a light version, but still.

Or, 'neighbour taking the mick'?

What was the point?

Turning your question around - how much do you think the OP should spend just to try and punish the neighbour?  Given that neither of the above are actionable with a realistic prospect of achieving a financial gain to the OP.  And without LP the OP is on the hook for their full costs.

ThisIsWeird

Section62 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

'Trespass with criminal property damage'? Ok, a light version, but still.

Or, 'neighbour taking the mick'?

What was the point? A reminder of what this neighbour has actually done, and as an indicator of their calibre.

Turning your question around - how much do you think the OP should spend just to try and punish the neighbour?  Given that neither of the above are actionable with a realistic prospect of achieving a financial gain to the OP.  And without LP the OP is on the hook for their full costs.

Nothing. It costs nothing to apply legitimate pressure on the neighbour. As you would presumably have to, in order to request the boundary markings? (Which are a far lesser, even zero, concern).
Or are you suggesting that pobjoy himself sorts out these boundary markings? Surely not?
As you know, I have never suggested that Pj try and tackle the trespass or damage issues, since he does not have Leg Prot. And as I'm sure you appreciate, I pointed them out above as a reminder of what this neighbour has actually done, and as an indicator of their calibre. So Pj fixing 2 or 3  boundary studs is not holding them to account, persuading them they should act towards a resolution, or even protecting himself moving forwards when he does have LP.
The RoW markings are of far greater practical significance to both parties; that is the literal line they should not cross. 
The actual boundary line, as pobjoy points out, is a doddle to determine at any point, but it doesn't actually matter in practice.
The RoW line, however, does matter, very much. The neighbour obliterated this, so Pj requests they reinstate it, with valid reasons, and with evidence of its accuracy. The neighbour doesn't have to do this, of course, and Pj won't try and force them to. But, how will that refusal look? 
Reasonable, valid, completely justifiable pressure, at no cost, putting the neighb on the back foot, and - should this escalate - you tell me the neighbour's (lack of) response won't matter? These Q's and requests will almost certainly make the other party go, "Damn".
I could not disagree more with your assessment that this thread has largely been making the situation more complex and harder to resolve. 

Land_Registry

Section62 said:

It would be interesting if @Land_Registry has any thoughts on this.

I doubt if any commentary from Us would assist here as the legal advice already sought appears to have covered it for the OP
It's not 'illegal' to enter into a boundary agreement but I'm being picky on the words chosen as do appreciate that's not really what's being questioned or challenged here.
In England and Wales if you want to transfer (registered land) or convey (unregistered land) you need a legal deed to do so, namely a Transfer or Conveyance.
A boundary agreement won't achieve that and in most cases such an agreement is drawn up to reflect the agreed position re the boundary rather than 'move it' - in essence if the registered extents show the general boundary and that effectively matches the reality on the ground then you don't need a transfer and an agreement might be something to consider. A Determined Boundary application is also an option where both parties agree also but all about what's wanted Boundary agreements and determined boundaries (PG40s4) - GOV.UK

pobjoy

@Land_Registry 

Thanks very much for the input. I believe my deeds leave no doubt as to the position of the legal boundary (the deeds describe RoW strips of unspecified width on either side of the boundary that logically must be the two halves of the removed concrete path) However, the path isn't shown on the LR plan so the 'red line' - which clearly follows the alignment of the path - isn't very helpful. My instinct tells me that if I participated in a boundary agreement that stated the boundary was actually on the western side of the path, not in its centre (the position indicated by the text of the deeds) I would be knowingly trading land without a Transfer or Conveyance. Do you think I am being overly scrupulous/cautious by refusing to participate in a boundary agreement?


^ LR plan


^ Plan sourced from council showing boundary and RoW strips in relation to path.

pobjoy

Something that occurred to me today...

Communications between myself and my neighbours' solicitor have, thus far, been conducted almost exclusively by email. When the solicitor first got in touch with me in March it was via a letter, and when I imposed a Nov 15 completion deadline in August I thought it wise to send the message in the form of a signed-for letter as well as an email. Apart from these postal interludes, all of our negotiations have been digital.

Re-reading that initial March 4 letter today (a letter that includes the sender's email address) I noticed this small print in the footer "We do not accept service by email or facsimile". Does this mean the solicitor could at a later date claim (for example) that I didn't supply them with the boundary position evidence they requested (evidence supplied as email attachments) or deny that they agreed to purchase my half of the path (a 'commitment' made by email only)?

I am now wondering if I should insist on communication by letter going forward.

ThisIsWeird

Have they replied to any of these emails?