Oops! Just started an accidental neighbour dispute

[tinytoessize4]

Any legal eagles reading? Advice please...

We have a shared passageway only with next door, enclosed at either end, and locked at our end (we did not put the lock on and have evidence to prove this). We thought we owned it outright, but this is not the case as it is a restrictive covenant in the deeds. Anyway, we propsed to move our kitchen downstairs into the passageway area, knockig down our internal wall to create an open room. Yes, we know the planning permission necessary and checked this out. Out of courtesy we informed our neighbour of our pending planning permission application. We have a small son and one bedroom. We only have 2k to do the alterations. I'll continue...we informed her of this, and that she had never utilised the right of access since we had been there and never since the previous owner of our house had been there either. She got a wee bit shirty. Saying that we admitted blocking our passage by placing a lock on the door (!) to which she didn't have a key (why? because she never bothered to get one when whoever put the lock on did it.) and that this was actionable nuisance. grr. she said she wanted monetary compensation for this. We said we didn't have any money. But we do have a shared right of access across the back of her property. We offered to exchange this. She hasn't yet responded. We said it would be best if we met face to face (terrible but we haven't met her and we've been here 2yrs! We were talking by letter). She's a litigation lawyer and though I am a law student, still have a year left. She quoted James v Stevenson [1893] AC 291 at me but I couldn't find it on Westlaw. Where do we stand with regard to the fact the right of access hasn't been exercised by her for about 10yrs? is there any precedent of lapsed right of access? Sorry its long ladies & gents....

You want to extend your kitchen into a shared passageway??

I'm not surprised the neighbour is p*ssed off.

not that this is any help with the legal question mind you

what soupy said. You are determined to extend your house onto land that isn't actually yours alone, and you are surprised that the other owner objects? Bloody hell.

so, you want to build into the passageway and forgo your right of passage across the back of her house? How do you get stuff to the backgarden? Through the house? What about emergency access in the event of a fire/other emergency?
Would it not affect saleability in the future?

Sorry not helping on actual question.

You think you can extend for just 2k?

I am that your title is 'accidental' neighbour dispute.
You want to extend your kitchen into a shared passageway that you think her use of has lapsed because she has been locked out of it?

You may be able to put in for planning permission but I don't think the pp people look into the ownership of the land you are planning to build onto. They assume you already have that. You don't.

And tbh your only having £2 for an extension made me wonder if you are a troll its just such a silly amount!

She would probably get you on the party wall act too if you came over into the pasageway.

Go and knock on her door.

we have knocked on her door several times. And its £2000. We know about the party wall etc act in respect of notice period and serving notices. there is an open lane next door to our house which leads to the back parking area. neither of us have a garden. The passageway has not been used by herself since we have been there, nor during the time of the previous owner. She has never made any attempt to use it at all. she never even came round to say she wanted to use it either. The passageway is 2 and a half foot wide, if we knocked our internal wall down we would create space for the kitchen units. Trading right of access seemed a reasonable idea-we really couldn't give any money across to her. but i think what really irks me is the fact that she is a highly qualified solicitor with a 3 bed house and drives a mercedes and well, my hubby works for the NHS for a pittance and drives a £500 used car and we have a little one and a 1 bed house. we had to sell a bit of furniture to afford the alteration money i n the first place. we can't afford to move cos the price has dropped too much to get any deposit back. we got the house before we knew i was pregnant. the fact that she didn't even know there was lock on it and as far as we were told the lock has been there for 10yrs suggests that she has never - nor ever will-use it. a was only looking for a little advice.

If you pursue this you may end up spending more than 2000 in legal fees alone.

maybe she is worried about noise. If you no longer have the passeway btw you they will be able to hear your appliances etc for the new kitchen
You sound a bit jealous of them, what tey earn has nothing to do withit
Agree with Togger, she will know what she is talking about and you will have to pay legal fees

The car she drives and the car you drive are completely and utterly irrelevant.

Sorry, but if you start thinking of it as class warfare along the lines of poor little NHS employee DH versus rich lawyer her, you're going to end up throwing a lot of money at other rich lawyers and end up with nothing at all. You may not have intended it, but your message does sound like she should just roll over and give you this passageway because your DH works for the NHS and drives a banger.

It actually doesn't matter if she uses the passageway or not. It might still add value when she comes to sell.

Perhaps one of your professors can give you free advice.

Thinking about it more, how much money has she asked for to sell her rights to the passageway? Your bank may let you extend your mortgage to pay her, as your property will be worth more if it has a larger eat-in kitchen than a tiny galley kitchen.

I think she is being more than fair offering to let you buy her out of her rights to the passage.

You need to check your deeds for covenants reagrding the passage way as well.

i have one of those passageways at my house

Myself and the old neighbour had a key... BUT then the other house was sold (to people who rent ot out) and all the new tenants have not had a key
(I KNOW my old neighbour who owned the house would have past the key on, but their landlords say they havent got a key)

therefor I am the only key holder

theyre is NO WAY i would expect to extent into this passageway... it would devalue their house

equally there is NO WAY i would ever allow them to extend into it either

the passageway is NOT yours so why do you expect to be able to build on it and for it to magically become yours?

also as for never bothering to get a key...

well IMO if you put a lock on something that you shared its only common courtisy to gove them a key... she not have had to ask IMO (I appreciate it wast you who installed the lock, but from her point of view)

How would you feel if they wanted to extend into the passage?

i don't think you will get permission

i would object like hell if i were your neighbour

can't see how you can build onto SHARED land

am also agog that this will only cost £2k - please can i have the name of your builders?

It is not her fault that you aren't as well off as her - doesn't mean you are entitled to steal her land.

The fact that she hasn't used it to your knowledge for some time is irrelevant IMO. It's still a SHARED passageway, not yours to do with as you will.

If you want to extend, you'll have to think of some other way - perhaps the loft? If it's impossible to extend this house, I'm afraid your only option is to move into one that does have potential. Not her fault if you can't afford to do that.

It's not planning permission that matters here, that doesn't have anything to do with land ownership. Even if you get planning, it doesn't mean you can build on shared land without the joint owner's consent. And if you get into disputes over party walls, you will end up spending LOTS of money on legal fees and have nothing left for any extension.

i don;t thikn you are going to make a terribly good lawyer if you are prepared to ignore the salient facts.. this is shared land.. they have every right to dispute this.. and not checking the deeds for restrictive covenants... going in all guns blazing saying that she has never utilised her rights to the passage therefore you are going to build on it would have put her on the defensive straight away

i would be more surprised that you will only spend £2000 to do all this

you sound quite bitter that they are 'considerably richer than you'(can;t type in a harry enfield birmingham accent ) well, when you qualify you can thrash them then, can;t you

tinytoes,no legal advice I'm afraid, but just wanted to say that I feel for you, sounds like you were totally not expecting her reaction and you're a bit taken aback by it and what to do now.

From her point of view, I guess you would've looked pretty unreasonable, as others have said, it is shared land and even if she doesn't use it, will impact on the value of her house.

The shared right of access across the back sounds like a helpful focus for negotiation, especially if she suggested it, as it might mean neither of you have to feel you are losing out,

But if I were you, the first step would be to smooth things over with her, face to face ideally - would she come over for coffee? I'd take a 'one-down' position to her, in your shoes, ie., apologise, say you hadn't realised the full implications -give her space to come down from feeling defensive, if she is. And then ask her advice on whether & how there is a way around this. If she really knows her stuff, legally speaking, getting into a battle with her will just leave you on the back foot all the way.

Good luck with it!

I think Spink's advice is very good.

Is there not a law library where you can go and read the cited case?

here?
"In James v Stevenson (1893)it was claimed that a fence was well off a boundary; the boundary apparently had been created without certified survey. The judge found that: ?there arises ? a very cogent presumption in favour of the existing fence being on the line intended and expressed by the deed of conveyance ? a presumption not to be displaced, if at all, unless by the most conclusive evidence of error in the actual position of the fence. There was evidence that the fence line had been accepted and used for many years as the boundary, back to only three years after its creation. The alternative was to position the boundary by measurement a long way from an unreliable start point. Uncertified divisions provide no public record of start points adopted. Therefore increasing doubt over measurement or start points increases the weight given to occupation. This is particularly so if the start point now adopted was redefined by another surveyor subsequentto the division. What was the boundary position the parties at the time were least likely to be mistaken about? The actual position on the ground that they agreed to (and which they probably occupied), or their assumed start point being the same one which modern survey redefines

McClelland (2001)advises: If the occupation has stood for a long time, provided of course, that it is on a common boundary, then the acquiescence of the parties makes its status as evidence very much stronger. ?the Court may regard the occupation as evidence of the way in which the original parties interpreted the deed, and thus as first class evidence of their intentions"