AIBU to object to neighbour using my garden as their main access?

[Deepblueokay]

Fully expecting to be told this is my own fault for not looking into it properly but need a vent all the same!

A year ago I moved into an end of terrace house. There is the usual easement arrangement with the adjoining neighbour that they can get access to their back garden via my back garden. I know that is pretty standard and I was obviously aware of it when I purchased. Since moving in however it's become clear that they use it as their primary entrance. They never use their front door. They have a sign on the front door telling post man/ couriers etc to go round the back. Again, wouldn't necessarily be a big issue except that there seems to CONSTANTLY be someone walking through! It's an older lady living there with her grandson. He is late teens/ early 20s maybe and in and out like a yo-yo, no exaggeration. Ditto her boyfriend, her dog walker, her cleaner, her food shop, couriers (she gets at least two packages a day!) .... The latter particularly pisses me off because they often don't close my gate behind them. I have an OAP dog and 4 children, the youngest of whom is 4. It'd take literal seconds to slip out of the garden without anyone noticing 😠 And frankly, now that its summer time it just feels quite intrusive. Strangers walking in and out while my children are playing. I stupidly feel awkward sitting outside to read a book even though it's my fucking garden!

Is it even a legal thing to say that they are over using their access?!

Should also add that I would probably mind all this less except that at the end of last year the handle of my gate broke. It was the week before Christmas and I didn't have time or money to fix it and it wasn't particularly a priority for me, but I told the neighbour I would sort it after Christmas, quite reasonably I thought. (I have a side door so actually rarely use the gate). Neighbour told me I had to fix it because it is "YOUR gate" and "a public right of way" (it isn't 🤣).Then proceeded to tell all the other neighbours that I was "refusing" to fix it because I didn't use it and that she "couldn't even get her food delivered" and would "rather die than use the front door"... After a week of hassle and harassment I ended up getting a friend's husband to fix it for free and neighbour has since apologised but... I don't know, it just left a sour taste.

Is there anything I can do? Do I just have to wait for her to move/die?? 🙈

You’re making very confident statements without seeing the actual wording of the easement. Nobody - including me, you, or the OP - can say what the neighbour is entitled to until the deeds are checked.

Some easements do allow access for invitees. Some easements restrict access to the occupiers only. Some specify “on foot only”. Some specify “for the purpose of reaching the garden”. Some include maintenance obligations. Some explicitly exclude third parties. It all depends on the exact wording.

And while “excessive use” isn’t a legal term, “reasonable use” absolutely is. Even a broad easement has to be exercised reasonably, forcing gates, propping them open, and directing couriers through someone’s private garden all day may or may not fall within that, depending on the wording.

So until the OP has the deeds in front of her, nobody can state the legal position with certainty. The next step is simply to get the documents and see what the easement actually says.

@Deepblueokay

From what you’ve shown, it looks as though:

• You’re the end terrace (No. 49).
• The path down the side of your house appears to be within your title (outlined in red).
• Your neighbour’s rear gate opens onto that path near the back of your house, so they have to walk through your garden area and past your kitchen window to reach the street.

If that’s correct, then their right of way is almost certainly a legal easement over your land. However, having a right of way does not mean they can behave however they like. The gate This is the strongest point you have. If they’re repeatedly leaving your gate open, allowing your dog or child to escape, they’re not exercising the right reasonably. They should close the gate behind them. You are entitled to have a gate on the route, provided it doesn’t prevent them using the right of way. A self-closing hinge or spring is often a sensible solution and wouldn’t usually interfere with their rights. Using the rear as their main entrance Unfortunately, unless the wording limits the right, they may be entitled to use the rear access every day. The fact they choose not to use their front door doesn’t automatically mean they’re exceeding the easement. Deliveries This is more debatable. If they’re asking every takeaway driver, supermarket delivery, courier and postie to come through your garden several times a day, you could argue that this is an excessive use of the easement. Rights of way normally extend to visitors and people coming to the property, but if the level of use has increased significantly compared with what was originally intended (for example, because of constant online shopping or food deliveries), there can be arguments about whether the use has become unreasonable. These cases are very fact-specific. What I’d do I would first have a calm but firm conversation and say something like: “I’m not disputing your right of access, but I need you to close the gate every single time. My child and my dog can get out if it’s left open. I’d also appreciate it if delivery drivers could use your front door where possible, as they’re constantly coming through my garden.” If that doesn’t work:

1. Fit a self-closing gate.
2. Keep a written record (and, if you have one, CCTV footage) of occasions when the gate is left open.
3. Ask your conveyancing solicitor to obtain the 1989 transfer deed referred to in your paperwork. That document may contain restrictions on the right of way that aren’t shown in the extract you’ve posted.

In England and Wales, if someone has a legal right of way over your land, you must not substantially interfere with that right. A locked gate is not automatically unlawful if:

• they can still exercise their right of way without unreasonable difficulty;
• you give them a key (or another reliable means of access, such as a code);
• the lock is there for a legitimate reason, such as security or preventing your dog or child from getting out.

Courts have accepted in some cases that locked gates can be reasonable where the person with the easement has a key and access isn’t made materially more difficult. In your situation Your reasoning seems sensible:

• You’re not trying to stop your neighbour using the path.
• You’re trying to stop any delivery driver, courier or stranger from walking through your garden.
• You’re addressing a genuine safety concern because the gate is being left open.

A Yale-style lock could achieve that provided your neighbour can still get through whenever they need to. One practical concern is that if your neighbour expects every delivery driver to come to the back door, they’ll either have to:

• meet the driver at the gate and unlock it, or
• have deliveries made to the front door instead.

They couldn’t reasonably insist that you leave your gate unlocked simply for the convenience of third-party delivery drivers. Before installing one I’d suggest writing to your neighbour first (or sending a text/email) saying something like: “I’m going to fit a lock to the garden gate because it’s repeatedly being left open, which is a safety risk for my child and dog. I’ll give you a key so you continue to have full access under your right of way. I’d also ask that deliveries are made to your front door unless you choose to meet the driver at the gate.” That shows you’re acting reasonably rather than trying to obstruct their rights. One thing I’d also check is who actually owns the gate itself. From the plan it looks like the path is on your land, but if the gate is your boundary gate, that generally strengthens your position.

If people want ChatGPT answers they generally use ChatGPT rather than Mumsnet @T1Dmama

🙄

OK this is the best I can do, and this is just one of many different formats I could illustrate.. Imagine it like this, a row of adjoining terrace houses. The front of each house opens up directly onto a pavement (not always the case) so they cannot keep the bins out front. They have to keep them in the back gardens but there is no back access from the gardens. Lets pretend for instance, a railway line runs down the back of the houses. So Terrace 1 can have a side gate on their back garden so they can bring their bins out. Terrace two cannot because there is no direct access to their back garden (houses both sides and its not reasonable to expect them to drag their bins through the house. So when the houses are built, an easement is created saying that Terrace two has the right to take their bins out (for example through Terrace 1's back garden) but they must stay on a specific path. That path is part of Terrace 1's garden.

The easement exists only because Terrace 2 has no independent way to reach its back garden. So the builder grants a limited right of access across Terrace 1’s land so Terrace 2 can do essential things like take bins out, bring garden waste through, access the rear for maintenance, deal with emergencies. This is quite typical for where I live in the North.

The bog standard easements don't give Terrace 2 the right to treat Terrace 1’s garden as a normal walkway, entrance, or thoroughfare. It also doesn’t give rights to visitors, couriers, tradespeople, dog walkers, cleaners, boyfriends, randoms. Unless the wording explicitly includes “agents, invitees, visitors” (very rare in residential easements), the right normally applies only to the occupiers. But the devil is in the detail and that's why the OP needs to check the exact wording.

Most easements of this type specify in some manner the exact route, the obligation to cause minimal disturbance, the requirement to keep gates shut, the requirement to maintain security, the obligation to act reasonably. They’re often worded like: “A right of access on foot only over the path coloured yellow for the purpose of removing refuse bins and maintaining the rear garden.” That’s the level of restriction you typically see. Not that I am an expert, but I come across this in my career on a regular basis. I hope it helps.

But some people have mentioned it can become prescriptive i.e. roughly speaking (this isn't exactly it) if Terrace 2 has been allowed to use that pathway in an additional manner, say as the main access to their house for residents, visitors and deliveries etc for 20 years then it can become what is called prescriptive and they in effect become entitled to use it that way.

From what the OP has said, I don't think this is applicable here (assuming its England) but we won't know until the land registry is checked.

But I am thinking if the deeds already grant a limited right of access, you cannot then claim a broader right (e.g., “I want to use it as my main entrance”) by prescription. The law says: you can’t prescribe against an express grant.
They already have a right of access. They cannot “grow” it into a right of way or a right to use your garden as their front door.

Their use is not “as of right”, they’ve been told off by previous owners, told off by the OP, apologising, arguing, claiming it’s a “public right of way” (which is nonsense). That is not peaceful, uncontested use. It’s use that has been challenged, which breaks the prescriptive clock.

I don't think that is ChatGPT? Why do people assume that no-one on here knows what they are talking about and need to use ChatGPT. The law of averages has to say that occasionally you will get someone that does the issue in question as their job, so will have the correct spiel for the answers!

@T1Dmama It was very helpful anyway, I learnt a few things there.

Yes

The formatting and especially the bolded bits feels very ChatGPT, the wording not as much.

I use AI to check grammar. Mostly it just adds a comma and the odd semi-colon but sometimes it changes the formatting too. But it's still is my words.

Just watch out for that formatting vibe- if you’d unbolded it wouldn’t have hit the ‘this is AI’ button for viewers who see a lot of AI writing . I agree the wording doesn’t feel it, but the formatting strongly does.

This is a useful post OP

If a right for everyone to access the property isnt given by the deeds, it very likely exists now after 40 years unfettered use .

OP haven't read all the replies so apologies if repeating.

Have you spoken to your local council to see what the chances are of getting a Public path diversion order if you've room at the bottom of your garden?

May be worth a try.

It's not a public footpath. The council can't do anything.

@Anonomoso , the council won't touch it. It's not a public path.

So till @Deepblueokay gets the deeds and sees what the wording is , it’s no point saying what she can and can’t do

is that right ?

I am suprised that the estate agent or op solicitor didn’t pick this up - or maybe the estate agent as works for the seller they wouldn’t mention it ?

I did think the right of way was only for bins /house owner to use - not for delivery people - Joe public and all her family friends etc

You're not in South Yorkshire are you @Deepblueokay because what you are describing is the norm for terraces here. I dont know a single person who lives in one and who uses their front door, everyone goes round the back.

I don't doubt that this is true but, say if the way she's using it actually isn't allowed by the deeds and therefore she has been using it "illegally" the whole time... How is it fair that it suddenly then does become legal, to the detriment of my property/security/peace!? I didn't live here 40 years ago so how could I object? I don't really understand how that works.

Land used for a certain number of decades as a normal public access can become a statutory public footpath with full legal protection.

Not saying it is here, but it's not as cut and dry as you think sometimes.

Usage - it’s not about you it’s to do with the way the property has been used over a certain amount of time. Usually solictors are all over this kind of thing when you buy.

She almost certainly won't have been uslng it illegally but if she has she probably will argue that she has used it for x number of years without objection.

We don't know what's in your deeds.

If your deeds are like mine, there is no unfairness involved unless she has done something we don't know about.

Not in this sort of case. No one is going to declare a PRoW to the back door of a house. Unfortunately for the OP I would be very surprised if there is anything she can do to make her neighbour or her guests use her front door.

Similar to adverse possession.

The thing is, it's the norm in some places but not where the OP is - the other neighbours aren't using the easement (apparently). Maybe they come and go via the other end.

Where everyone does things the same way there is etiquette- norms within the norm, if I can put it like that. OP wouldn't have been surprised by the toing and froing, and I'm guessing that leaving a gate open with little children in the garden would not be accepted. Or maybe gardens are used differently? Not regarded as a safe outdoor room where kids can play while parents are in the kitchen? Or a private place for a nice al fresco meal? Would be interesting to hear how the flow of neighbours affects garden use in South Yorkshire.

OP needs to talk this through with someone who lives there, can see the setup and knows the history. The solicitor can spell out the letter of the law, but what happens day to day is about people finding a way to get on with each other.

It is an interesting problem though. Do let us know how you get on OP.