Money Moral Dilemma: How do I tell my neighbours I can't afford to pay towards replacing our fence?

billericaydickie

There is a lot of misunderstanding about the "T" on the Land Registry plan. It refers to the property which has the right to erect a fence on the boundary line, note this is a right not an obligation. If the "T" is not in your favour and you wish to erect a fence the whole fence, including the footings, must be on your property. 

Anything else is an arrangement between individuals and does not involve property law. Any arrangement you enter into must be honoured and the owner or owners of the fence may maintain it or not; there is no obligation to maintain a fence but it must remain safe. No-one except the owner should attach anything to the fence or alter it in any way without the owners permission. 
This does not address the moral issue but does give a logical reason should you not wish to contribute.

Section62

billericaydickie said:

There is a lot of misunderstanding about the "T" on the Land Registry plan. It refers to the property which has the right to erect a fence on the boundary line, note this is a right not an obligation. If the "T" is not in your favour and you wish to erect a fence the whole fence, including the footings, must be on your property. 
...

The 'T' symbol simply demarks a boundary which is referred to in writing in the deeds.  If there is nothing in writing then the 'T' symbol means nothing and confers absolutely no rights or imposes any responsibility.

If the deeds state there is an obligation to provide and/or maintain a fence on the boundary marked with a 'T' then there is an obligation.

WIAWSNB

Section62 said:

ripongrammargirl said:

...
From my understanding of having owned 4 properties, I was always told by my solicitors (and it was always drawn in the deeds) that there were no “shared” fences as every property should have clear boundaries; anything to the left side of your property when facing your front door is your boundary and anything to the right is the neighbour’s responsibility. I’m sure this is standard, at least that is what I was always told (and by estate agents as well) so I would use this rule of thumb. But do check your title deeds as it may not even be your side to worry about....

The left/right thing is a myth.  Responsibility is purely contained within the deeds (or not).  If there is nothing in the deeds then there is no responsibility, except as others have said where you have animals (such as a dog) and need to keep these on your land.

Further to this is another detail that was brought to my attention recently on the Gardenlaw forum; covenants come in two essential forms, positive and negative. The latter dictates what you mustn't do - extensions, sheds, lamas, that sort of thing, and could include to not have a physical fence. These are ongoing with new owners. 
Positive covenants - you must do this, eg put up a physical fence x feet tall - are between the author and the first owner. They are effectively extinguished on sale, unless the covenant is written in by the seller to the new owner. 
So, even a +ve deeds covenant to 'maintain a physical fence' cannot be enforced on subsequent owners.
In short, if you want a fence, and the neighbour doesn't play ball, then tough - it's up to you.

primrose_penguin

I cannot understand why your neighbours paid for the fence in the first place, before you bought the house, it makes me wonder therefore if it is their responsibility and if so they should bear the cost. Check your deeds like others have said, if you are unsure why don't you visit your nearest citizens advice centre and take your deeds with you, it doesn't cost anything for their advice. If it turns out you are responsible for half of it then I would go back to your neighbours and explain you are not in a position to contribute towards the fence and hope they are reasonable enough to understand, they obviously can afford to replace it or they would not have done so. Good luck.

kimwp

RealPersonB said:

I'm surprised to see so many comments suggesting the author should simply not pay. Clearly, the deeds need to be checked to determine who is responsible for the fence, and that will establish who should cover the cost. But if the fence is 100% the author's responsibility, or even shared 50/50, then they must find a way to get the work done. Full stop. There's no room for debate. Maintaining a cordial relationship with the neighbours and speaking to them openly may help, especially if they are in a position to contribute or proceed with the repairs sooner. However, if the neighbours take on the cost, the author should repay them, even if only in tiny instalments over time. I find it baffling that some people believe not having the money is a valid excuse not to pay. It's no wonder Britain is on the decline...

In general, even if someone is responsible for a boundary, there is no responsibility for maintaining a fence on the boundary.

Purple_pup

We moved in to our house 3 years ago and there was a massive leylandii hedge separating our garden from 2 other houses access road.  Our sellers had always maintained the hedge both sides (I think maybe as it was planted on their side of the boundary). As we didn't really like it and one of the neighbours kept nagging us every time it grew we decided to remove it.  We've paid solely for a new fence (12m, cost a fortune) even though the T is on their side and the deeds state that they must maintain a stock proof fencing.
To be honest I don't know how they could easily put up a fence as it appears the tarmac road edge is the boundary.  So we have put it on our land.  Just concerned any future residents of their property may think its theirs.
We paid as we gained a quite a lot of extra garden by the removal of the leylandii so it suited us, and we need to keep our dogs in.
The other neighbour asked me if they could cut some ivy off the adjoining bit of my fence, oh and by the way its not in a good state, so I had to break it to her gently that it was hers - she took it quite well - but she wont be replacing it as she cant afford to.

House13

"I'm sorry but I can't contribute financially to replacing the fence. But I am more than happy to help you by offering my support for the labour"

CapeTown

House13 said:

"I'm sorry but I can't contribute financially to replacing the fence. But I am more than happy to help you by offering my support for the labour"

And I am sure the person supplying and erecting the fence will be delighted to reduce the cost to your neighbour as a result

MeteredOut

CapeTown said:

House13 said:

"I'm sorry but I can't contribute financially to replacing the fence. But I am more than happy to help you by offering my support for the labour"

And I am sure the person supplying and erecting the fence will be delighted to reduce the cost to your neighbour as a result

I've never know a trade who would reduce their cost based on their customer (or a neighbour of their customer) helping; most think (and probably realise) that it could end up taking them longer.

There are exceptions. eg, if they would otherwise hire a labourer, and the customer can fill in that role, but what if the customer doesn't work as fast as their usual labourer does and the job takes longer? Who pays for the extra time?

Might be worth saying it to the neighbour if they want to appease them, but I doubt it will save them any money.

CapeTown

MeteredOut said:

CapeTown said:

House13 said:

"I'm sorry but I can't contribute financially to replacing the fence. But I am more than happy to help you by offering my support for the labour"

And I am sure the person supplying and erecting the fence will be delighted to reduce the cost to your neighbour as a result

I've never know a trade who would reduce their cost based on their customer (or a neighbour of their customer) helping; most think (and probably realise) that it could end up taking them longer.

There are exceptions. eg, if they would otherwise hire a labourer, and the customer can fill in that role, but what if the customer doesn't work as fast as their usual labourer does and the job takes longer? Who pays for the extra time?

Might be worth saying it to the neighbour if they want to appease them, but I doubt it will save them any money.

Methinks you are not recognising sarcasm