what is reasonable! neighbour drive dispute update vvvv long sorry

[walterwhitesgf]

Link to old thread (hopefully)www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/a2307681-To-say-FOTTFSOF-long-boundaries-house-sale-neighbours?msgid=52565261#52565261

Apologies- meant to update for those kind souls who took an interest. I would appreciate opinion, informed or otherwise as I am so mired in this it’s hard to know what is reasonable anymore.
Many conversations about this matter instigated by neighbour and after speaking to my solicitor close examination of the deeds and a covenant drawn up the 50’s (including one doctored by them showing a fake line drawn up the entry) it seems that the entry and a path (that no longer exists) in front of the entry, are party pathways and to be kept clear and maintained by the three properties they serve. Though if you remember they have blocked their other side neighbours access to these. I agreed in the interest of being completely pissed off with the whole thing neighbourliness that I would keep the area in front of the entry and just park on my side of the drive...though I was pissed off about this as the neighbour’s daughter who sold me the house told me it was my drive area.
I stated many times that I would not agree have my drive, or the shared bit in front of the entry door (it’s a composite and is all one surface) drilled into, dug up to allow a border to be made , have a line painted down it have anything attached to it etc etc as my neighbour claimed her buyer wanted .I consulted the original company who laid the drive and they said they would not recommend doing any of the above as it would compromise the integrity of the surface and weeds, water etc could get in , cracks could form and spread across the whole drive. They also told me after I gave them my address that they had received a number of enquiries regarding my property, though they didn’t give me any names.
Then about a 10 days ago neighbour said she was giving buyer an ultimatum, buy as it is or they (the neighbour) would pull out. Much relief all round. A week later she came round saying buyer had agreed to proceed but wanted them to write a history of how the drive came to be as it was, wanted me to sign an affidavit stating I would keep to my own bit of the drive, and agree to a marker on the drive indicating the boundary. Basically back to the beginning again! My partner (joint owner of property) at this point said enough is enough. He also pointed out that if prospective buyer was like this now, what he would be like as a neighbour. Especially if every time he made a request re our property, reasonable or not, we conceded. He has refused to sign anything or to have a marker stuck on or drilled into the drive and after looking over the legal docs again; I don’t think any further clarification is needed. I told my neighbour at the weekend and she was not happy
Yesterday ndn daughter doorstepped me as I came back from work and said that unless I agreed to the demands, they would be taking me to the small claims court to recover the £4000 they would lose by the sale falling through. I just said to her, ‘well you will have to do that won’t you’ and walked in to my house. It’s getting v upsetting and feels like harassment now. What is my next move mnetters?

sorry i misunderstood that it was their land to give.

Collaborate I was going by the information in the OP where it simply states close examination of the deeds and a covenant drawn up the 50’s (including one doctored by them showing a fake line drawn up the entry) it seems that the entry and a path (that no longer exists) in front of the entry, are party pathways and to be kept clear and maintained by the three properties they serve There is no indication that any specific part is owned by one house.

It will though be owned by someone, and from the OP's posts it appears the deeds say OP and neighbour each own one half of the path. The question is whether neighbour has by their actions divested themselves of their side of the path.
Whether the obvious signs of the original path remain or not, any ROW granted over that land will still subsist.

i would check the ROA/Easement laws.

there used to be Easement access across the back of our house to the neighbour on the end, but it was blocked about 25 years ago.

When the new person moved in two years ago, they asked for that Easment to be reinstated and we refused it as its not been used by that house for a long time, and their claim was refused... they basically lost their ROA across the back of our house legally.

The fact that house c hasn't used it, and your neighbours 'gifted' it to you as your property, you may, legally, be allowed to claim it as your, but im not sure if the right time has elapsed.

OP will you please post with paragraphs ? I can't read your posts. Ta.

from the OP's posts it appears the deeds say OP and neighbour each own one half of the path.

I thought she said that the neighbours had drawn a fake boundary line down the middle.

Everyone else has managed to read them, emmelinelucas

Thanks again everyone for responding
ASorcerer the path/entry isn't divided in half as it were . Its jointly the responsibility of three properties and must be kept clear, if you think about it, entries etc couldn't be divided down the centre for ownership or one party could decide to claim or fence off their half, thereby impeding access.
emmeline apologies, I thought I had , just hadn't put line space after. I do have to write quickly at times , my layout has probably suffered , but I wont be reposting it (its not that gripping)sorry.
My plan now is (I think) send a letter from my solicitor stating all communication to be via him in future, why I used the drive in the way I did in the past ( which was down to them and their family) and that I will not be parking on the 'pathway' in future . That I do not agree to any defacement of drive or pathway , (the company that laid it said that even painting or using adhesive is a problem) and that I expect assurance from them of the same.
FWIW my(adult) children are now furious and want to go and knock on neighbours door and be aggressive... Obvs I wont agree to this! They have suggested the mention of harassment in solicitors letter though.
I really didn't want to involve solicitor as I still feel that their sale of their property is on the whole nothing to do with me. I feel that the family's manipulation of the boundaries both front and back has begun to bite them on the bum and they have bought this on themselves. However as they have proved themselves to be tricksy and aggressive I want to somehow state my position in a way that cant be misinterpreted or come back on iyswim.

Sorry ASorcererIsAWizardSquared, I meant to name Collaborate

The third neighbour doesn't know their access way is blocked as they are a tenant and the owner lives down south. Ndn changed boundary and removed their gate in between one tenant moving out and another moving in

so these two faced lying toads are pulling the SAME stunt again - only this time with the other neighbour?!!!!

i think they call that fraud! i would be mentioning that to your solicitor and to the prospective buyers and i would actually go and get the landlords details from the 3rd neighbour and inform the landlord.

Teach the lying toads a lesson!

the path/entry isn't divided in half as it were . Its jointly the responsibility of three properties and must be kept clear

The basic principle of land law is that each parcel of land is owned by someone - either on their own or jointly with others. When you bought your house the Land Registry plan will have given you an idea of the boundary of your plot. This is only a rough guide though, and the lie of the land will tell you more. Your awkward neighbours own their plot, and the owner of the 3rd house owns their plot.

The way you've phrased things suggests that there is a small strip of land, the width of the path, that is owned by all 3 title holders. That would be nonsensical.

I'm satisfied that the path is owned by someone:

1. You alone; or
2. Your neighbour alone; or
3. You and your neighbour each owning a strip. So either the path is at the edge of your plot, the edge of your neighbour's, or it straddles the boundary.

For others to have the right to pass over your land there needs to exist a right of way. A ROW can be created in the deeds (and will show on your Land Registry title), or can be created by long usage.

You can do what you want with your plot, except substantially interfere with a ROW in favour of another.

It is highly unlikely to be the joint responsibility of all 3 owners (responsibility to do what? - keep it clear? surface it?), although the deeds will set out any responsibilities that others may have over your land, or that you may have over another's.

Cololabotate, thanks for taking the time to think about this. You obviously know something about property law and I am grateful for your help.I don’t know whether this is the root cause of the complication but this is the brief history of where I live A terrace of 5 properties built around 1780 as accommodation for workers from the nearby big house and farm and not owned by the tenants. There was no road, they were in a wood and the rear of the properties, their gardens if you like, were not divided up, though the whole plot was bounded by a wall which is still there.
By 1920 ish the whole block was owned by one family who lived in the properties, over time they divided up the gardens and sold the houses. The deeds of mine and my difficult neighbour’s house show our property boundary as being the line of our house i.e. the edge of the entry and subsequent phantom path. A covenant from the 50’s dating from when my house was sold by the 1920’s family (if you are still keeping up) gives pages of detailed instructions and colour coded drawing setting out just who owns what and who can go where. It states that the entry and paths I have been referring to are ‘party pathways ‘and are the joint responsibility of three properties. All are responsible for maintenance no one can obstruct them and we must all allow access to each other. Our solicitor said our ndn neighbour doesn’t ‘own’ the paths/entry in question but then neither do I. To me after studying them it seems clear, which is why I am reluctant to sign legal documents and have a white line painted down the drive or have cats eyes installed. There is no ‘line’ on my side of the path but its easy to see if I cross into the pathway with my car for example, and it would have a detrimental on my drive if we interfered with the surface,(plus looking horrible on a period property).

Gordon Bennett! why can I not get peoples names right!
I meant Collaborate sorry, can you tell I am tired?

That seems a weird way of dealing with it. I suggest you get office copy entries of the title and plan from the land registry (you can get them on line) for all 3 properties. The 50s conveyance will be the original conveyance from when your property became a single plot. The plans will say what you own, and that will presumably be carried over in to the Land Registry docs.

If none of the conveyances actually sold the strip of land that is the plot, it will still be owned by whoever owned it in the 50s (or their beneficiaries under their will). The 50s conveyance should have granted you an explicit right of way over the path (maybe it does, but it's unclear).

I think you may need to speak to you solicitor about adverse possession.

From what you have said, no further clarification is needed. I would accept the fact that the "path" is not yours, and would not park my car there, but I also would not be interfering with the surface in any way (markers etc). If anyone has queries just refer them to the deeds where it seems to be clearly set out.

If, however, you have anything from the precious sellers in writing telling you the land was yours I would pursue this.

But listen to Collaborate, not me!

I would suggest to your neighbours that if they wanted to they could repave both driveways as long as you can vet the plans and the company doing it.

The driveway can have "crazy paving" with a border done in a different colour, and a border up the side between your drives indicating the middle path way kind of like this www.pavingexpert.com/images/flags/patt_3size_tbb_cbp.jpg

There's no way I would want to live next to the people who are trying to buy currently, they do sound like real nightmares.

actually I have no problem with the buyers. They want the boundary very clearly marked on their deeds before they go ahead. They know there has been a dispute and they won't buy a house with a dispute, they want the dispute resolved before they buy.
That is perfectly understandable.

The simplest thing would be for you all to sign an agreement recognising the 1950s deeds, with the boundary lines clearly marked on them and the shared passage clearly marked. it seems to me that all the hassle is because they want it to be theirs or your and not shared, whereas the deeds say shared.

Surely the only people that could force any change are the owners of the third rental property as the other two parties ( neighbour and previous owner) agreed to the driveway as is. Now they would need consent of all three to change it again and that can't be agreed so tough. It sounds as if you own it and they simply have right of access. I can't see how you can be forced to do anything except keep it clear.

Steppe but why sign something to say we agree with what already exists, and the prospective buyer owns nothing atm. There was no dispute before ndn came to sell and then the changes they had agreed with the previous owner, their daughter, they wanted to change to ease their sale.
collaborate we did speak about adverse possession but our solicitor was concerned that as the drive wasn't fenced it may be harder to prove , Obviously it would cost and looking at the deeds etc it was clear we had been shafted so we decided we would have to suck it up

None of the properties' owners own part of the path. OP's predecessors in title had no right to pave the path. similarly no one has any right to draw a line in the middle of it. Each owner can do what they want to the side edge of the front of their plot. The person to stop anyone doing what they like in relation to the path is the actual owner, who will be the 1920s owner, or OP if she can claim adverse possession. In the absence of a successful adverse possession claim then everyone is a trespasser unless using the path for the purpose intended - to access their rear gardens.

The reason I would sign, is to mark the dispute as concluded. Otherwise it remains open. Of course you have no need to, as you aren't trying to sell, and it is possible that you might still decide to go to court to get that piece of land, so I would understand that you wouldn't necessarily want to.

But, for any perspective buyer, theirs of possibly at some point yours, there needs to be some evidence that the dispute is resolved. That paper exists, but they don't want to abide by it. The simplest way of ending it once and for all is to all agree to sign to abide by the existing document.

As collaborate says, none of you have the right to then do anything to this collective path. You can do what you like to your own bit at the side, even if you don't like what they do, that bit is theirs.

I see what you mean, I suppose I have thought if it isn't clear enough with the documentation they have then a repeat of it wont make it clearer.

yes but you are agreeing together that you will all stick to the document

as I said, this is in their interest, you can happily do nothing, but it would close it once and for all.

btw I am not a lawyer, so I wouldn't do this without legal advice.