Land Law

MDR

Hey all,

I am involved with in a boundary dispute with my neighbour, it
has been going on for quite some time, but recentily came to a head
where he built a boundary wall in my absence and in the wrong place.
Now I confirmed beyond a shadow of doubt by way of an ordinance
surveyor etc that boundary is the wrong place by eight feet, but
he is in a complete state of denial about it.

I amn't getting any satisfaction out of him, I suspect he knows he
is wrong but is just spinning it out in the hopes I will let it go, neither
do I really want to invest big money in dragging throught the courts.
Iis there a third option, a place for resolving boundary disputs like the PIAB or
the small claims court ? i have already sent him a registered letter outlining
my position to no avail.

Any advice ?

MrNuked

Sledgehammer. It's on your land so i think you are allowed to do that.

MG

I'm in a situation which looks like it will go a similar way so I'd be interested to know how this pans out. Would having a look at his planning permission help? If it was contrary to planning, the county council might do the dirty work for you by ordering him to knock it.

Sleipnir

You need to take a trip to http://www.landregistry.ie/ to begin with.

Maximilian

I think you are going to have to go and see your solicitor. The Land Registry has no authority to resolve disputes, that is assuming your property is registered there, which may not be the case.

spongebob

If the Land Registry confirms it is your land then sledgehammer it....simple. It is an absolute right on your land.

I had a problem with me trees in me last house and the muppet next door. Muppet insisted on writing pompous letters about the trees . Muppet simply would not ask nicely and go halves on the cost of the surgery. I retaliated by ringing a mate in forestry who sent out a statutory notice under some 1940's Forestry Act telling me not to touch the trees . I nailed a copy to a tree like a site notice . There it rested for a full year.

The trees were already there (albeit smaller) when muppet originally built his house.

Muppet still would not ask nicely. He instructed his solicitor . I ignored him for another 6 months or so. In the end , after the Forestry lifted the statutory ban having had a look at the trees in question.....some scrawny lodgepole pines and lelandii....... I doctored them a bit. They look ****ing awful now, 3 years later. The branches lie where they fell.

I could not touch the 2 overhanging branches that were causing muppet the most grief as they overhang his land and he never authorised me to enter his land or indemnified me were I to do so. Muppet can cut them back to the boundary wall when he feels like it. Muppet always could have done so without muppeting me in writing ...although that could possibly have imbalance the trees and made them fall. Muppet still has not done so.

I DO know a boundary is a boundary is a boundary. The Land Registry folio is the absolute gospel on this . If the boundary remains as it has been marked by your neighbour for 12 years there may be a squatters rights claim. A right of way (if it exists) can be extinguished quicker...as little as a year I believe.

No planning permission is needed for a 6 foot (or less) wall IIRC save ina conservation area . Dont waste your time with the flutes in planning unless the wall is over 6ft or 2 metres .

M

Maximilian

Muck wrote:

If the Land Registry confirms it is your land then sledgehammer it....simple. It is an absolute right on your land.

The Land Registry folio is the absolute gospel on this .

A Land Registry folio is not gospel when it comes to boundaries, I'm afraid. The maps are simply not that accurate -1/100 scale I think. Even if they were, the Land Registry has no power to tell him to feck off. If this guy has encroached onto your land and he refuses to piss off, you are going to have to go legal with him. You won't be able to conclusively resolve this matter, unless you go to your solicitor.

spongebob

Maximilian wrote:

A Land Registry folio is not gospel when it comes to boundaries, I'm afraid. The maps are simply not that accurate -1/100 scale I think..

The maps are gospel unless they show an overlap of some sort Max

Even if they were, the Land Registry has no power to tell him to feck off. If this guy has encroached onto your land and he refuses to piss off, you are going to have to go legal with him. You won't be able to conclusively resolve this matter, unless you go to your solicitor.

No point in doing this until you have checked the map yourself . If the map shows that it is your land then you sledgehammer the wall and let the neighbour instruct HIS solicitor and send a copy of HIS Land Registry Folio map along , certified by the solicitor .

I fail to see how 1/100 can turn into 8 feet though . 1 foot here and there would sound more like it.

If there is an overlap of the two maps then life will be complex , I agree with you there Max. . You will have to give a surveyor the two maps and get the surveyor to check maps going back to find out when the mistake was introduced and possibly how and in favour of whom.

Solicitors are sh1te at reading maps .

M

Maximilian

Muck wrote:

The maps are gospel unless they show an overlap of some sort Max

Sorry, that' simply not true ref. S.85 of the Registration of Title Act 1964

"85.—Registered land shall be described by the names of the denominations on the Ordnance Survey maps in which the lands are included, or by reference to such maps, in such manner as the Registrar thinks best calculated to secure accuracy, but, except as provided by this Act, the description of the land in the register or on such maps shall not be conclusive as to the boundaries or extent of the land."

Also, see Hickey vs. Brodrick [1931] L.J.Ir 136 (if you're arsed!)

Muck wrote:

Solicitors are sh1te at reading maps

Now that's just not true

RainyDay

See a good solicitor. If you are in the right, he will eventually be paying your legal costs.

MG

Hi Guys

As I mentioned above, I am at the start of what is likely to turn into a boundary dispute. Its about trees on a ditch. My planning says that the hedge must be retained. I checked my neighbours planning and the hedge isn't mentioned. (in fact there are very few conditions relative to mine)
However, my planning pre dates his so I find it extraordinary that the hedge isn't mentioned.

My theories are:
1. There is an old planning permission in play - I've heard this may be the case but didn't notice it mentioned in the planning I looked at.
2. He doesn't own the ditch/hedge at all - my best info is that it is a boundary hedge and is owned half/half
3. ????????

Any ideas?

spongebob

What is the ISSUE with the trees at the moment ?

Are any trees over which there is an issue within 100 Feet (30m) of either or both houses ?


M

MG

The issue is that I came home one day to find half the trees on the ditch gone. They are on his half of the ditch (substantially in any case). It looks really bad now, our privacy has been affected and these people have been quite unpleasant.

MG

Oh and yes the trees are within 100ft of both houses.

gibo_ie

AFAIK- Boundry hedge will be owned by one party and not both. Whoever does not own the trees can cut any overhanging branches without your permission. The same actually applies to roots growing under their side of the trees!! If it is in the right place, they cannot force you to cut them down unless they are of danger. Most planning officers insist you keep any large trees that are on the site.

in relation to the intital post about the wall. Check with land registry..its a start and only costs 25 yoyo for a printed folio. your solicitor can then send a letter with a copy of the folio demanding a removal of the wall within 28 days (or whatever) and this will only cost 50-100 quid for the letter. After that i would bring it to a small claims court....or judge judy!

good luck with that!

spongebob

Once the trees are within 100ft of their house they can cut what is on their side........be that an overhanging branch back to the boundary where the trunk is on your side or the full tree if the trunk is on their side.

If the trees are over 100ft then you can get into trouble with the County Forestry officer if you cut them.

Ring the Dept of Ag Forestry Section Here
Johnstown Castle Estate Co Wexford.
Lo-call 1890 200 509 also 053 - 63400.

and they will discuss the matter/issues with you in detail .

Unfortunately there is no way to turn ignorant muppets into considerate neighbours Sorry .

M

MG

Gibo - that's very interesting. Can anyone confirm that? It would explain why the hedge wasn't refered to in his planning.

MG

OK Thanks Muck. These people have been nothing but trouble to us and our other neighbours. It's still a live issue (this isn't the only problem they have caused) so I'll say no more for the time being.

spongebob

MG wrote:

Gibo - that's very interesting. Can anyone confirm that? It would explain why the hedge wasn't refered to in his planning.

MG . I would suspect that the planner who granted your house permission likes trees while the planner who granted him permission does not. I take it you checked his planning permission(s) and there is no retention condition .

Lots of planners are useless ....never mind inconsistent.

M

MG

Yep checked his planning - couldn't believe there was no hedge retention for him when there is on me. Ironic, as there is no way I would have touched the trees anyway. It's him who needed the condition in his planning, not me.

Also, from a little research it would appear that a boundary can run through the middle of a hedge/ditch.

narommy

My rellies are farmers and they say that one person owns the hedge and the other owns the ditch. ??

MG

Just to clarify - I am defining a ditch as a mound of clay/soil etc (rather than a trench downwards. The hedge I assume is the vegetation such as trees on top of the ditch.

narommy

The ditch is a trench for draining water. The hedge is the row of trees

If your neighbours are so "nice" I think your best option is to get legal advice and get it sorted once and for all.

spongebob

While checking his planning did you note that he showed frosted windows in his gable (facing you) which are now clear glass in the built house....that or no windows where there are windows ...again facing you.

Thats is an invasion of privacy and he should not have gotten planning permission if the detail drawing showed clear glass........always allowing of course for the fact that the planner was a cretin which is very common in this country If his planning permission is less than 5 years you can ask the planners for enforcement....namely the removal of the clear glass and its replacement with opaque glass blocks or frosted glass.

If his house is built over 5 years I think you have less chance.

M

narommy

Muck wrote:

While checking his planning did you note that he showed frosted windows in his gable (facing you) which are now clear glass in the built house....that or no windows where there are windows ...again facing you.

How do you know this?

spongebob

Am I wrong Narommy ? :)

M

Victor

Muck wrote:

While checking his planning did you note that he showed frosted windows in his gable (facing you) which are now clear glass in the built house....that or no windows where there are windows ...again facing

That would of course depend on proximity, lie of the land, said hedge / trees, etc.

MG

The wording of my planning permission would imply that the planner shares my definition of ditch.

As I said, this is a live issue so I don't want to write too much except that the law appears to be an arse and for some reason every avenue appears to be skewed in their favour. I realise that there may be a temptation to think that if the law is agin me then I am probably in the wrong but if I were to divulge the full details it would certainly show the law to be crazy. An example of this is that my neighbour is legally entitled to cut down the trees on his side of the hedge but I am not allowed cut down those on my side. There are even worse examples but I don't feel it prudent to say more at the moment.

We are gathering as much information as possible and are preparing for the worst.