To ask who I’m supposed to report my CF neighbour to?

[BarkItOff]

I live on a new build estate, it’s been up a few years now but the roads are still unadopted so it’s ‘technically’ private.

There is a park on the estate and there are 2 access points to this park. 1 at the entrance to the estate and 1 further down the estate close to a neighbouring estate.

One of the neighbours has put a sign up further down, stating private road, I mean technically yes but public access is still allowed but the CF has also put a chain and padlock on the gate to the path that leads to the park with a sign saying private!

I have been told this was because children from the neighbouring estate were using the park via this entrance and as we pay for the upkeep of the park it’s private. Except it’s not! It’s still a park able to be accessed by anyone. It’s made it particularly annoying for people on this side of the new build estate that have children as you have to walk all the way round to the front to get onto the park when there is literally a gate that leads to an access path right in front of you. And those of us that walk dogs there like to walk full circle, in one end and out the other and now we have to double back.

As the roads are unadopted will the council sort this and point out that she doesn’t own the park. The builders are long gone and we’re a nightmare to chase up snagging never mind anything else so they will be no help. The management company doesn’t want to know and say it’s not their responsibility. I’m tempted to go and cut the chain but I guess that’s criminal damage as she owns the chain.

Eh. I’d be using bolt cutters whilst looking incognito and like a stereotypical burglar so the ring can’t pick up my features. No one is going to stop this- the only option (maybe) could be a lawyer since technically the private road is owned by all of you. Or let her know you are petitioning for it to be hers and the full cost of maintaining it being hers alone. Otherwise you need to accept you’ll never get access again that way and move on

since technically the private road is owned by all of you.

No where in this thread has this been confirmed or denied. This is why the OP feels like she is banging her head against a brick wall. I don't understand why the management company can't simply tell her who they are acting on behalf of and where she can obtain written evidence as to who is entitled to use what.

Legally the park should have a sign on it with the details of who to contact in an emergency, padlocking one of the gates would be a breach of ROSPA guidelines in their weekly and quarterly inspections so I’d raise that with them.

Can the gate be removed?

She owns the chain, not the gate, so get rid of the gate.

It will be a condition of the planning permission. Developers have to provide a certain amount of open space and this will include a set number of areas of play. It will be a breach of planning for it not to be open space so the councils S. 106 officer should be able to help enforce the conditions.

I think the OP may have just found her answer. 👌

Bolt cutters.

If the bolt-cutting police come along, tell them you were only doing it to protect lovely old Nora from getting into trouble for doing it in the first place.

Cut out the middle men, calls and emails. Simply snip.

We have been told. The roads are owned by the residents, the entirety of the roads owned equally by all residents. Not that we each own a certain part of the roads. The park is public.

Ok, so told by who, and where is the documentation to support this? Which residents were responsible for appointing the management company who is refusing to help you? Because collectively you can hoof them out and appoint another, if you are a % owner of the road. Did the solicitor not go through all of this in detail when you bought the place?

Also as a PP mentions, why are you paying towards the upkeep of a public park?

It’s quite literally on the site plan. The park is inbetween 2 estates. It has gates either side to allow for access. Technically half of it is on land owned by the freeholders and half on land owned by the council. It was built as a condition of planning for the new builds and maintenance of it, alongside maintenance of all shared areas is split by the freeholders (the residents). On the site plan it is labelled public playground. The issue is not the park however, the issue is the access gate to that park.

It isn’t the actual park gate that’s locked. There actually isn’t a fence around the park. It’s the gate that leads to a side path that leads to the fields and park.

Ok, so this is moving in the right direction now. You are freeholders who own your % share. This means a limited company must exist, and there will be directors of it. The directors are the ones you need to raise it with, and you should all have a lease which explains all the rules & regs of the land you are a part freeholder of.

I responded to you saying we should have been told. We were not told as such. It is in the house deeds, the site plan and freeholder agreement.

The management company was appointed by the developers.

It is very common in new builds to paying maintenance for a public park and the park was a condition of the planning permission.

We don’t have a lease. It’s not leasehold.

Can you do a diagram?

So as I said in my PP, if you are the freeholder of the land on which your house sits, and a % freeholder of the road & the associated park space, there has to be a limited company and directors of it.

If they are not serving you well, the management company appointed by the developers can be removed and replaced by the directors of the freeholders, this is perfectly normal in, say, a block of purpose built flats, where management companies get brought in and out (I know this as I carry out work on sites where this happens, and every so often I am told that I will be sent instructions from a different company and need to change who I invoice accordingly).

Whilst it may be the case that what's happened is outside of the scope of the management company (and for what it's worth I think that's a right cop out), they should at the very least have signposted you to the directors of the company that has been set up to administer your share of the freehold.

By lease I am mean the rule book if you like, that state what you can and can't do on areas of a shared freehold (for example, chaining off gates).

You are a freeholder, but that will that you own your % share of the freehold. That's why you have a lease, which ensures that everyone knows how to behave.

I can do one better. Here is the site plan.

The red circle I have added is gate 1 that leads to the park. That is open. The red X is gate 2, that one has been locked.

Ahh yes we have a title deed. It does not mention gates.

So in that case does it mean any Tom, Dick, & Harry can come along & chain them? Does it also tell you who the directors are, or at the very lease the name of the limited company set up in order to allow you a share of the freehold of the road?

It lists the developers and the management company appointed but nothing that states directors.

Who maintains the park, ie. Who cuts the grass, clears rubbish, empties the bins, carries out safety checks etc? It is their responsibility to ensure that access to the park is just that. Accessible. It doesn't matter that there is another gate.
I assume that this is either a parish or town council or the local authority and they will be able to enforce the removal of the padlock. If it is the management company then despite them denying it, it is in fact their legal responsibility and they must remove the padlock.

It seems to be split and therefore a bit messy.

The homeowners, via the management company pay for maintenance of the entire green shaded area, grass cutting etc. There are no bins in that area. We have tried and failed to get a dog waste bin as we were advised the council are responsible for waste collection in that area and they would not agree to empty a bin they had not installed.

In that case, are you quite sure the developers are no longer involved? Because they will have been the original freeholders and will have released the freehold to each property as and when it was sold. However, the shared area (in your case a road) can only belong to one organisation, and if you are the freeholder of it that means you own your % share of that freehold and are part of the company that was set up to administer it.

So in other words, it either belongs to the developer, or it was sold off to the residents who will have to have formed a limited company together in order to own a % share of it.

I’d instruct a solicitor and get them to write to him with all the necessary evidence to remind him. A solicitor will do this (I work for a law firm). It might make him stop.