Fuious neighbour - boundary question

Dave Henderson

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 11:20:02 AM6/16/13

to

Yesterday I cut the foliage and branches from four metres of privet
hedge, that was about 4 feet high, between my garden and my neighbour's,
intending to remove the roots and replace the hedge with a ranch fence.

As I was cutting, I was confronted by my angry neighbour who told me to
stop and said that the hedge belonged to him.

Looking at the line of the hedge, I'd assumed that it was mine, which is
why I hadn't consulted with him before starting.

At his request I stopped cutting, and left the roots in place. By this
point I'd removed about half the height of the hedge.

I decided to leave the hedge as it was not to inflame him further, and
put some fence posts in on my side of the hedge at least to fill the gap
as soon as possible.

At this point he completely lost his temper, saying the the previous
occupant of my house had built an extension - which is now my study -
onto the party wall without planning permission some twenty years ago.

He was shouting and swearing and saying that if I didn't resintate the
hedge to its former condition within a week he would knock down the wall
of the extension; he actually came out with a sledgehammer and hit the
wall three or four times, breaking the corner off a uPVC fascia.

I came inside as he seemed completely unamenable to reason and at the
insistence of a friend called the police. My partner and four-year-old
son were becoming quite distressed by the loud shouts and threats, and
the banging on the house.

The police arrived; I explained the situation. They said that hedge was
a civil matter but the damage he had done could be criminal. They went
next door to speak with the neighbour, who was still very angry and
agitated - I could hear him shouting at the police.

When they returned they asked if I wanted to pursue charges. I declined
because I didn't want to escalate tensions any further.

This morning my neighbour's wife called round to remonstrate with me and
to say that I had been provocative by doing things with fence posts even
after I'd stopped cutting the hedge.

She was angry at what I'd done, angry that I'd called the police and
showed me some plans of the property purporting to show where the
boundaries lay.

At this point all I could was keep apologising and say that if I'd made
a mistake with the hedge I would do what I could to put it right.

I said that I hadn't removed any roots and that the branches and foliage
would grow back. She said that she wasn't happy to wait for that, and
expected me to reinstate a four-foot high hedge. She demanded that I
start looking in garden centres.

In fact I bought a couple of privet plants this morning and planted them
but as you can imagine they're rather spindly - I expect that they are
not going to be satisfied with that.

I now don't know for certain whether the hedge is on my land or his,
though I felt sure when I began; he seemed so certain, that it may be it
is actually his.

I'm not sure what to do next. I didn't sleep last night, and I don't
know what to expect next from the neighbour. I've done nothing but
apologise since he first objected but he seems determined to pursue a
confrontation.

The damage is done - what can I do? Even if I had the deeds in my hands,
it would still require a surveyor to know where the boundaries lie on
the ground.

What's the worst case scenario, assuming that I've managed to chop down
some of his hedge?

Thanks for any advice or suggestions,

Dave

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 2:15:02 PM6/16/13

to

If indeed the hedge does belong to the neighbour they can insist you
replace like with like, if yuo have ripped up a four foot hedge then
you must relace with a four foot hedge.

You can request he trims back any of the hedge that overhangs your
property if he fails to do so tyou can trim it back to the boundary line

Google gardenlawplenty of helpful advice there

Ignore his rantings about planning permission, after twenty years no
one is likely to be interested, they probably wouldnt have records that
far back anyway and if the constructions under (i think)30 square
metres the planning permision wont be required only building
regulations.

Again after this length of time they wont be interested.

Peter Crosland

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 3:05:01 PM6/16/13

to

Given the strength of his reaction it might have been better to pursue
charges. In any case you need to check the deeds and probably get some
professional advice as to the exact location of the boundary. If he gets
stroppy again I would not pussy foot around but call the police.

--
Peter Crosland

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 4:20:03 PM6/16/13

to

steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

> Dave Henderson wrote:
>
> > Yesterday I cut the foliage and branches from four metres of privet
> > hedge, that was about 4 feet high, between my garden and my
> > neighbour's, intending to remove the roots and replace the hedge with
> > a ranch fence.
> >
> > As I was cutting, I was confronted by my angry neighbour who told me
> > to stop and said that the hedge belonged to him.

> If indeed the hedge does belong to the neighbour they can insist you
> replace like with like, if yuo have ripped up a four foot hedge then
> you must relace with a four foot hedge.

Is it even possible to purchase a hedge four feet high? Or what if it's
possible, but just tremendously expensive, and something that will grow
back after a while anyway?

Daniele

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 4:40:01 PM6/16/13

to

Yes you can although it can be difficult to get from retail outlets.

The replacement cost is irelevant if he has ripped out the hedge, the
neighbour is entitled to have it reinstated as was.

On a project a few years ago a tree got destroyed the main contractor
had to replace with a similar tree of similar maturity, costs of £100K
were being bandied around at one point

Never saw the final cost but i drove past recently and the tree had
been replaced.

BartC

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 4:40:10 PM6/16/13

to

"Dave Henderson" <davehe...@example.com> wrote in message
news:1l4kg6q.4iczz5nb5cg0N%davehe...@example.com...

> I now don't know for certain whether the hedge is on my land or his,
> though I felt sure when I began; he seemed so certain, that it may be it
> is actually his.

You need to establish that I think. Is the line of the hedge in-line with
the outer wall of the disputed extension?

It seems unlikely that an extension would be built on a neighbour's land
while they just stood and watched.

Who normally maintains the hedge? (Which is an unusual choice between two
gardens if there isn't also a solid fence.) What about the opposite side?
Usually you're liable for one side, or the responsibility is shared. You
need to check the deeds.

How far over the alleged boundary was the extension? Does the neighbour have
proof (in the form of *their* deeds and plans) of where the border is? Can
you deduce the likely border by looking at how similar houses on the street
are divided? (Look also at Google Earth, Maps etc.)

In any case your main problem is not so much responsibility for a hedge, as
having a crazy neighbour with a sledgehammer.

--
Bartc

Zapp Brannigan

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 4:45:02 PM6/16/13

to

"Dave Henderson" <davehe...@example.com> wrote in message
news:1l4kg6q.4iczz5nb5cg0N%davehe...@example.com...

> What's the worst case scenario, assuming that I've managed to chop down
> some of his hedge?

Worst case scenario is that you apologise for an innocent mistake, and you
replant where necessary to repair. It's trivial. As SR says, the alleged
transgressing study is old news, far too late to do anything.

The guy sounds like some kind of maniac, and you should call the Police if
you get any more trouble from him.

Percy Picacity

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 4:55:01 PM6/16/13

to

On 2013-06-16 19:05:01 +0000, Peter Crosland said:

> On 16/06/2013 16:20, Dave Henderson wrote:

>> snip

>> I'm not sure what to do next. I didn't sleep last night, and I don't
>> know what to expect next from the neighbour. I've done nothing but
>> apologise since he first objected but he seems determined to pursue a
>> confrontation.
>>
>> The damage is done - what can I do? Even if I had the deeds in my hands,
>> it would still require a surveyor to know where the boundaries lie on
>> the ground.
>>
>> What's the worst case scenario, assuming that I've managed to chop down
>> some of his hedge?
>
>
> Given the strength of his reaction it might have been better to pursue
> charges. In any case you need to check the deeds and probably get some
> professional advice as to the exact location of the boundary. If he
> gets stroppy again I would not pussy foot around but call the police.

Seconded. Bullies thrive on placation and compromise, and will just
demand more. I cannot believe a court would order you to dig up a
viable hedge and plant one twice as high. For a start it would not be
available and secondly it is the wrong time of year to transplant and
it would almost certainly die. If the base of the hedge is intact it
will grow up again in a year or two, and any financial damages would be
minuscule for temporary loss of hedge height. Any violence or threat
of violence against person or property should certainly result in a
criminal charge. As I say, if you let him off he will just come back
and do worse. In the meantime pay a surveyor to mark exactly where the
boundary line is and take things from there. If they want to shout at
you, tell them politely to leave your property, call the police if they
don't, and just politely walk away.

It is of course possible that your neighbour was bullied by the
previous occupant of your house, but that is no excuse for his
behaviour now.

--

Percy Picacity

Percy Picacity

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 5:15:10 PM6/16/13

to

There is a big difference between a mature tree (the destruction of
which may be criminal and the replacement by natural processes take a
100 years) and a hedge. Courts do not necessarily order this form of
restitution. And where the monetary value of the damage (loss of
height of a hedge that was only 4 feet high to start with) will be
minute they are certainly not going to order a course of action many
times more expensive. That is especially true, when as in this case,
there is no evidence of malice in the destruction of the hedge. But
even if it is a full-scale neighbour dispute and deliberate damage the
court is most unlikely to put the defendant to a hugely greater expense
than the monetary value of the damage.

--

Percy Picacity

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 16, 2013, 6:25:02 PM6/16/13

to

steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

> D.M. Procida wrote:
>
> > steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Dave Henderson wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yesterday I cut the foliage and branches from four metres of
> > > > privet hedge, that was about 4 feet high, between my garden and my
> > > > neighbour's, intending to remove the roots and replace the hedge
> > > > with a ranch fence.
> > > >
> > > > As I was cutting, I was confronted by my angry neighbour who told
> > > > me to stop and said that the hedge belonged to him.
> >
> > > If indeed the hedge does belong to the neighbour they can insist you
> > > replace like with like, if yuo have ripped up a four foot hedge then
> > > you must relace with a four foot hedge.
> >
> > Is it even possible to purchase a hedge four feet high? Or what if
> > it's possible, but just tremendously expensive, and something that
> > will grow back after a while anyway?

> Yes you can although it can be difficult to get from retail outlets.
>
> The replacement cost is irelevant if he has ripped out the hedge, the
> neighbour is entitled to have it reinstated as was.

He said he'd cut it down to about half its height, not ripped it out,
and presumably in a year or so it will be back to its former condition
anyway.

> On a project a few years ago a tree got destroyed the main contractor
> had to replace with a similar tree of similar maturity, costs of £100K
> were being bandied around at one point

We're talking about "four feet of privet hedge" here, not some large and
beautiful tree.

Daniele

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 1:20:02 AM6/17/13

to

The monatary damage would be the value of the hedge prior to
destruction
which would be the replacement of a mature 4 foot hedge .

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 1:25:01 AM6/17/13

to

Depends on your perspective of beutiful , i think the op has stated
that he has replaced some of the hedge.

The law doesnt differentiate and if it plecates the neighbour then its
money well spent.

If it goes to all out war its likely to cost a dam site more than a few
hundred pounds

Roland Perry

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 2:50:01 AM6/17/13

to

In message <1l4kg6q.4iczz5nb5cg0N%davehe...@example.com>, at
16:20:02 on Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Dave Henderson <davehe...@example.com>
remarked:

>Even if I had the deeds in my hands, it would still require a surveyor
>to know where the boundaries lie on the ground.

The deeds should tell you two things, where the boundary is, and whose
responsibility the hedges/fences/walls are on each side.

It's fairly unlikely, for example, that an object which is your
responsibility is located on his land (unless some very odd things have
gone on in the past).

Another thing to look at is what's on the other side of his garden, and
whether that looks like it's his or not (for example, if it's a fence
the posts are usually on the side of the person to whom it belongs).
It's unusual for someone to be responsible for the boundary on both
sides.

ps Can you give some more details abut the properties: Detached,
terraced etc. Approximate date of build.
--
Roland Perry

Peter Crosland

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 4:10:16 AM6/17/13

to

The deeds don't necessarily tell the whole story though they are a good
start. The chances are that the properties are registered in which case
you can get a copy of your neighbour's property from the Land Registry
for around a tenner including the plan. Details here.

http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/online-services

--
Peter Crosland

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 7:05:01 AM6/17/13

to

Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> > In any case your main problem is not so much responsibility for a hedge, as
> > having a crazy neighbour with a sledgehammer.
>
> The deeds don't necessarily tell the whole story though they are a good
> start. The chances are that the properties are registered in which case
> you can get a copy of your neighbour's property from the Land Registry
> for around a tenner including the plan. Details here.
>
> http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/online-services

Indeed,
<http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/faqs/how-do-i-find-out-where-the-
boundary-of-my-property-is> suggests that the boundaries are often not
precisely fixed until someone goes to the trouble of having them fixed,
by employing a surveyor.

That page says the alternative is "make a formal boundary agreement with
your neighbour(s) and ask us to be note it [sic] on your individual
registers", but that probably works less when the neighbour is
negotiating with a sledgehammer.

Daniele

Roland Perry

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 9:30:05 AM6/17/13

to

In message <1l4lypi.o7s9t411otzp0N%real-not-anti-spam-address@apple-
juice.co.uk>, at 12:05:01 on Mon, 17 Jun 2013, D.M. Procida <real-not-
anti-spa...@apple-juice.co.uk> remarked:
><http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/faqs/how-do-i-find-out-where-the-boundary-of-my-property-is> suggests that the boundaries are often not

>precisely fixed until someone goes to the trouble of having them fixed,
>by employing a surveyor.

It's not as bad as that for houses built since (when?) about 1970. The
builders generally lay the plots out so it's pretty clear by drawing
straight lines which bits of land belong to whom.

And even if not straight, a barely discernible wiggle in the deeds can
in fact be clearly staked out on the ground. For example here:

http://goo.gl/maps/ukfFL

The house on the left owned the entire space between the properties
(being in effect a private alleyway), and the square behind the privacy
wall; but the boundary between the remainder of the front garden was
marked by the [RHS of the] gravel strip between the two paved areas.
While this looked a bit odd on the deeds, once you've seen what's there
it makes perfect sense.

(Although putting the boundary, and the gravel strip, in line with the
side wall of the RHS house might have been more conventional, but making
access to their garages considerably more difficult).
--
Roland Perry

Peter Crosland

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 7:10:02 AM6/17/13

to

Quite! However the the OP cannot really get anywhere without seeing the
Land Registry entries to see that they reveal.

--
Peter Crosland

Martin Bonner

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 9:05:02 AM6/17/13

to

On Monday, June 17, 2013 7:50:01 AM UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <1l4kg6q.4iczz5nb5cg0N%davehe...@example.com>, at
> 16:20:02 on Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Dave Henderson <davehe...@example.com>
> remarked:
>
> >Even if I had the deeds in my hands, it would still require a surveyor
> >to know where the boundaries lie on the ground.

Quite.

> The deeds should tell you two things, where the boundary is, and whose
> responsibility the hedges/fences/walls are on each side.

Yes - but beware that the plans on the land registry are approximate only.
If you start measuring distances on them and scaling, you can find errors
of several metres.

> Another thing to look at is what's on the other side of his garden, and
> whether that looks like it's his or not (for example, if it's a fence
> the posts are usually on the side of the person to whom it belongs).

Usually, but by no means always. I have build a close boarded fence with
the posts on my neighbours side because it looks better that way.

> It's unusual for someone to be responsible for the boundary on both
> sides.

Again, it depends. I think technically my next-door neighbour is
(her house was build first - in the 19th century - on open fields, and
other houses have been built next to hers). Her house had to maintain
the fences before there were any other neighbours to do so.

Roland Perry

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 12:00:02 PM6/17/13

to

In message <f3e2aca8-9e18-4b4d...@googlegroups.com>, at
14:05:02 on Mon, 17 Jun 2013, Martin Bonner <martin...@yahoo.co.uk>
remarked:

>> Another thing to look at is what's on the other side of his garden, and
>> whether that looks like it's his or not (for example, if it's a fence
>> the posts are usually on the side of the person to whom it belongs).
>
>Usually, but by no means always. I have build a close boarded fence with
>the posts on my neighbours side because it looks better that way.
>
>> It's unusual for someone to be responsible for the boundary on both
>> sides.
>
>Again, it depends. I think technically my next-door neighbour is
>(her house was build first - in the 19th century - on open fields, and
>other houses have been built next to hers). Her house had to maintain
>the fences before there were any other neighbours to do so.

So your fence with the "backside" facing the neighbour is confirming the
assumption that the boundary in question is your neighbour's
responsibility (even if you have trumped them by installing your own
fence on [hopefully] entirely your side of the line).
--
Roland Perry

Martin Bonner

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 12:50:05 PM6/17/13

to

On Monday, June 17, 2013 5:00:02 PM UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
> So your fence with the "backside" facing the neighbour is confirming the
> assumption that the boundary in question is your neighbour's
> responsibility

No. I don't believe there was any requirement for either of the
properties to maintain the boundary.

Maintenance of the fence would have been my responsibility and
in fact, they couldn't touch it without trespassing because ...

> (even if you have trumped them by installing your own
> fence on [hopefully] entirely your side of the line).

... it was actually about 10cm my side of the old fence (which
was left untouched).

Of course, I'm assuming that the old fence was actually on the
boundary. I have no evidence for that, and I'm sure that the
fence I put up is being treated by both parties as the boundary
now (it was 20 years ago).

Mark Goodge

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 4:15:02 PM6/17/13

to

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 21:55:01 +0100, Percy Picacity put finger to keyboard
and typed:

>On 2013-06-16 19:05:01 +0000, Peter Crosland said:
>
>> On 16/06/2013 16:20, Dave Henderson wrote:
>>> snip
>
>>> I'm not sure what to do next. I didn't sleep last night, and I don't
>>> know what to expect next from the neighbour. I've done nothing but
>>> apologise since he first objected but he seems determined to pursue a
>>> confrontation.
>>>
>>> The damage is done - what can I do? Even if I had the deeds in my hands,
>>> it would still require a surveyor to know where the boundaries lie on
>>> the ground.
>>>
>>> What's the worst case scenario, assuming that I've managed to chop down
>>> some of his hedge?
>>
>>
>> Given the strength of his reaction it might have been better to pursue
>> charges. In any case you need to check the deeds and probably get some
>> professional advice as to the exact location of the boundary. If he
>> gets stroppy again I would not pussy foot around but call the police.
>
>Seconded.

And thirded. I think the most practical thing the OP can do now is to
obtain, at his own expense if necessary, confirmation of the precise
location of the boundary.

I would suggest that he informs the neighbour (in writing is probably best
at this stage) that he is obtaining precise details of the location of the
boundary and that, if it is indeed the case that he has inadvertently cut
the neighbour's hedge that he will pay for a full re-planting. But, until
they both know exactly where the boundary is, he should not carry out any
more work - either to mark his own boundary or to remedy the damage to the
hedge.

Mark
--
Please take a short survey on salary perceptions: http://meyu.eu/am
My blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 17, 2013, 7:00:04 PM6/17/13

to

Dave Henderson <davehe...@example.com> wrote:

> At this point he completely lost his temper, saying the the previous
> occupant of my house had built an extension - which is now my study -
> onto the party wall without planning permission some twenty years ago.
>
> He was shouting and swearing and saying that if I didn't resintate the
> hedge to its former condition within a week he would knock down the wall
> of the extension; he actually came out with a sledgehammer and hit the
> wall three or four times, breaking the corner off a uPVC fascia.
>
> I came inside as he seemed completely unamenable to reason and at the
> insistence of a friend called the police. My partner and four-year-old
> son were becoming quite distressed by the loud shouts and threats, and
> the banging on the house.
>
> The police arrived; I explained the situation. They said that hedge was
> a civil matter but the damage he had done could be criminal. They went
> next door to speak with the neighbour, who was still very angry and
> agitated - I could hear him shouting at the police.
>
> When they returned they asked if I wanted to pursue charges. I declined
> because I didn't want to escalate tensions any further.

I think that at some point in the future a letter to your neighbour may
be in order:

Dear Neighbour,

Re. <police authority name> incident. no. <police incident number>

On <date>, after threatening to demolish a wall of my house, you
attacked it with a sledgehammer, causing damage to the <whatever>
and <whatever>.

The police officers who attended the incident invited me to press
charges for criminal damage. Though I declined to do this, I do
require that the damage you caused to the wall be repaired.

I am willing for you to arrange and pay for the repairs yourself,
using a qualified builder of your own choice.

If by <date a week from now> I have not had confirmation from you
in writing that you are prepared to do this, I will employ my own
builder to assess and repair the damage you caused, and I will
expect you to cover the cost of the work and materials required in
full.

Yours sincerely,

Dave Henderson

If by this point you're receiving letters from Mr Neighbour's solicitor,
by all means address it to the solicitor.

I would imagine that any solicitor advising a client who has been
shouting his head off - to the police no less - about walloping your
wall with his sledgehammer is going to tell the client that it would be
sensible to pay for the damage. Since presumably Neighbour is paying for
this advice, he might even take it.

The fact that there is a police incident recorded is very useful. I
don't know whether you can obtain any details of the police report, for
example, what he actually told the officers, but it would no doubt be
helpful.

Given the situation as you've described it, should he fail to pay up
when presented with the bill, it's very much the kind of thing that the
County Court ("the small claims court") will deal with without any
difficulty.

To do that, you go to
<https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/overview>, register, pay
the modest court fee (a few tens of pounds) and describe what has
happened and why you believe the other party owes you money.

It's very easy to do, and you don't need to be able to do more than give
a coherent explanation of what has happened.

In most of the cases I've been involved in, I haven't even needed to
make the application - merely saying that I had prepared a claim and was
about to submit it did the job.

If the other party fails to respond to the court, he will lose by
default.

If he decides to dispute the case, there may be a hearing, in which case
you should hope he decides to bring his shouting and sledgehammer with
him, because if there's one thing a magistrate really adores it's having
a blustering idiot trying to throw his weight around in a court-room.

Given what you've described, it's hard to see how the judgement could
not go your way. The other party will need to pay back any court fees
you had to put up in the first place.

This is all in the future, so it's not necessary to worry about it now;
it may not even come to that. The point is that having deliberately
damaged your wall, he is liable for the cost of repairs.

If I were you I might set aside your letter until you've determined
what's to be done about the hedge - whether it is in fact yours to cut
down or not, and if it turns out that it wasn't, what you'll be doing to
satisfy any *reasonable* demands he may have about that - and have an
agreement about that *in writing*.

Then you can present him with your letter.

Daniele

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 6:25:02 AM6/18/13

to

I'm not a lawyer. I guess the claim would be in negligence. The usual
purpose of damages in tort is to put the claimant in the position they
would have been in had the negligent act not occurred [1], so far as
money is able to do so. So if the hedge has been destroyed then the cost
of reinstating the hedge seems right.

OTOH, if the hedge is still alive and likely to grow back to its former
height then you could argue that the thing lost is not the hedge, but
merely loss of the benefit of a full height hedge until it grows
back. Quite how you'd value that I'm not sure, but presumably it's
significantly less than the cost of a new hedge.

As others have said, all this is rather academic until we actually know
who the hedge belongs to.

[1] In contrast to damages for breach of contract, where it's normally a
question of putting the innocent party in the position they would be in
had the contract been performed.

Jonathan

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 9:25:02 AM6/18/13

to

On Jun 16, 7:15 pm, "steve robinson" <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
wrote:

> Dave Henderson wrote:

>
> Ignore his rantings about planning permission, after twenty years no
> one is likely to be interested, they probably wouldnt have records that
> far back anyway and if the constructions under (i think)30 square
> metres the planning permision wont be required only building
> regulations.
>

Not necessarily true. The place we own was converted into flats in
1950 and when we applied for building regs for some changes they asked
us for the original planning consent number. Luckily I had it.

Jonathan

Ian Jackson

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 11:10:05 AM6/18/13

to

In message <87sj0fe...@no-fixed-abode.cable.virginmedia.net>, Paul
Rudin <paul....@rudin.co.uk> writes

>

>
>OTOH, if the hedge is still alive and likely to grow back to its former
>height then you could argue that the thing lost is not the hedge, but
>merely loss of the benefit of a full height hedge until it grows
>back. Quite how you'd value that I'm not sure, but presumably it's
>significantly less than the cost of a new hedge.
>
>As others have said, all this is rather academic until we actually know
>who the hedge belongs to.
>

It's its a privet hedge, cut from 4' to 2', it'll be back to 4' in a
couple of months. Daily watering will help. If the OP still wants to cut
hedges, he is welcome to hone his skills on mine.

>
>

--
Ian

Dr Zoidberg

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 12:05:02 PM6/18/13

to

"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j0QxP9$viCw...@perry.co.uk...

True, but for something very minor like this, with no victim to give a
statement it won't make it that far.
--
Alex

Steve Firth

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 10:30:02 AM6/18/13

to

That was my experience last year. Some scrote decided to vandalise one of
my cars, unaware that a security camera caught him in the act. It was petty
damage easily fixed and I told plod that if he paid for the repair I would
forget all about it.

I wasn't given that option. The police/CPS have decided that there is
evidence of criminal damage and the CPS are prosecuting. End result is that
I have, so far, spent about 30 hours being interviewed by the police and
three days hanging around magistrates' courts waiting for a defendant who
absents himself. A waste of my time and money and a waste of police and CPS
resources for something that could have been settled fairly quickly as a
civil matter.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 4:10:02 PM6/18/13

to

Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:

> Sorry for your pain. But the point is that "pressing charges" is
> probably a USA-ian concept which arises from watching too many
> imported cop-shows.

But even in the USA it's up to the prosecutor rather than the victim
whether or not to press charges. From a practical standpoint it's a
matter of evidence - if the victim doesn't cooperate, there may be
insufficient evidence to convict.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

Periander

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 4:10:09 PM6/18/13

to

On 18-Jun-2013, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:

> You need to establish, if you can, whose hedge it is.

And the rest, good advice ... but ... the OP really wants to ask himself if
he really wants to continue living next to loons like those described. If
you can't maintain a civilised discussion over a hedge it does't bode well
for the future.

--

All the best,

Periander

Dave Henderson

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 4:15:05 PM6/18/13

to

Dave Henderson <davehe...@example.com> wrote:

> As I was cutting, I was confronted by my angry neighbour who told me to
> stop and said that the hedge belonged to him.
>
> Looking at the line of the hedge, I'd assumed that it was mine, which is
> why I hadn't consulted with him before starting.
>

> At his request I stopped cutting, and left the roots in place. By this
> point I'd removed about half the height of the hedge.
>
> I decided to leave the hedge as it was not to inflame him further, and
> put some fence posts in on my side of the hedge at least to fill the gap
> as soon as possible.

>
> At this point he completely lost his temper, saying the the previous
> occupant of my house had built an extension - which is now my study -
> onto the party wall without planning permission some twenty years ago.
>
> He was shouting and swearing and saying that if I didn't resintate the
> hedge to its former condition within a week he would knock down the wall
> of the extension; he actually came out with a sledgehammer and hit the
> wall three or four times, breaking the corner off a uPVC fascia.

Thank you to everyone for your comments and advice which are greatly
appreciated and very helpful.

I am now much less concerned about the hedge itself - if there is any
problem with that I am sure it can fairly easily be put right, at least
to the satisfaction of any reasonable party.

However, the demands and threats being made by my neighbour have
escalated. He has now started making demands about my extension, at the
rear, and my wall, at the front.

Here is the letter I received from him last night (*all* the spelling
and grammar is his):

Proposal to resolve the situation following your unacceptable action
from last Saturday morning 15th June 2013.

To resolve the issue with the least amount of costs to both parties

I would like an agreement drawn up and signed, in the presence of a
solicitor, that the rear hedge is to be restored to its former self. The
hedge is to form the boundary and we agree that this is not to be
changed, removed or replaced with exception to pruning, unless otherwise
agreed between ourselves.

I also propose that the front boundary be agreed to be a straight line
taken from the centre of both properties too the the centre of the two
water board stop taps in the pavement. You are to remove the wall that
is currently within our garden and replace it to its original form of
the privet hedge. The hedge is to remain as is after restoration and
which we both agree will not be changed in future, with exception to
pruning, unless otherwise agreed between ourselves.

All this work is to be carried out at your costs. This is to be done as
soon as possible.

We also want a written statement signed and witnessed by a solicitor
that you agree to honour our verbal agreement with the previous owner of
your property that when the rear extension was built straddling the
boundaries that the outer brick skin having been built on our property,
this would remain ours. Also I will require a pepper corn rent paid
annually to cover the overhang of your roof and bargeboard on our
property.

As a jester of goodwill though I find it hard to find any, we are
willing to pay 50% of the solicitor costs. If you should choose not to
go down this route we are willing to take this through the total legal
process and except the heavy costs and time that this would involve.

------- end of his letter ------

Last night after 11pm there was some loud banging upstairs on our
bedroom wall, that went on for about 10 minutes.

This morning there was a vertical line drawn on the wall (indicating I
suppose where he expects me to cut it down) at the front, with the
instruction: "This to be removed ASAP".

I didn't reply to him, but I am quite concerned that there is going to
be further damage, so I felt it best to replay to his solicitor - I put
this in the post today:

Dear <Solictor>,

I attach a communication from your clients, <name>; they tell me that
you will be writing to me and, should this be the case, I will respond
accordingly and in due course.

I am reluctant to respond fully to the content of their letter at this
stage as the issues they raise are expanding beyond that of rear hedge
and where it may lie on a boundary line.

I have already indicated my willingness to undertake restorative action,
as far as is reasonable, to reinstate privet hedging in the back garden
but the details of the options around this are unclear at this point.

I remain hopeful that this particular issue can be resolved to the
satisfaction of your clients, and remain willing to enter into a
dialogue with your clients if the tone is cordial and the content is not
litigious or unreasonable.

On Saturday 15th June <neighbour> deliberately damaged the end elevation
of my extension with a sledgehammer. The policer were called because he
threatened to knock down the wall, and an incident number has been
recorded.

While we attempt to resolve these problems, I ask that your clients
refrain from any further action that might damage or deface my property.
This morning for example (18th June) I found a vertical line drawn on my
front wall and the words "To be removed ASAP" written upon it in black
marker pen.

------- end of my letter ------

Sadly, I don't think his use of "jester" is an attempt at irony.

My concern now is to ensure that all these other matters don't start
getting muddled up in the matter of the hedge.

For example, the supposed encroachment of my front garden wall on his
land (something he has never previously complained about), or his
complaints about the extension that was there when I bought my house 15
years ago, or even this crazed notion that I pay him rent each year - I
have absolutely no intention of agreeing to any of these fantastical
demands.

I am also concerned about what this fellow may do next, to my wall or
house or something else. I fear that *whatever* I do, he isn't going to
be satisfied.

Any further comments or advice will be gratefully welcomed.

Thanks again,

Dave

Periander

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 4:30:01 PM6/18/13

to

On 18-Jun-2013, Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote:

> I wasn't given that option. The police/CPS have decided that there is
> evidence of criminal damage and the CPS are prosecuting.

Things have changed several times since then, I'd say that under the
circumstances you describe (assuming no relevant previous criminal history)
a "Conditional Caution" would be the best way forward - they can now be
issued by the police, last year they were CPS only and consequently fell
into the "to difficult" box.

In essence (taking you case as an example), the offender is offered the
opportunity to pay for the damage caused - it may be over several months,
obviously his income has to be taken into account and if he pays he gets a
caution, or more precisely the caution he was given stands. If he fails to
repay then the caution is torn up and off he goes to court. More or lees any
condition can be imposed based on the facts of the case and what is and is
not reasonable.

Periander

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 4:20:16 PM6/18/13

to

On 18-Jun-2013, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:

> I thought it was the CPS who made decisions about 'pressing charges'. If
> they have sufficient evidence they don't need your permission.

Yes, no and maybe ... over the last few years the rules have been changing
back to something more sensible (although once charged the CPS do take
over). *** Very broadly *** because there are a few anomalies police can
charge any summary only offence, any either way anticipated guilty plea, any
retail theft, any either way offence suitable for disposal in magistrates
court. The "ifs and buts" include any violence equating to ABH and above,
public order Affray and above, any "hate crime" and a few others including
those requiring DPP or AG permission to prosecute.

Also police have to assess the case prior to sending it to the CPS and
anything that doesn't pass the full code test(*) or (if in custody and
shouldn't be released) the threshold test can't be sent for advice - or if
they are they are sent back; anything suitable for a non-judicial case
disposal including simple and conditional cautions (excepting hate crimes
and indictable only ones) also have to be dealt with by the police.

There's provision for "emergency charging" by the police outside of these
guidlines and juest recently the public have been given the right to
challenge a CPS decision not to charge.

(*) Both tests include an evidential and a public interest test, to
authorise a charge the police ERO/DM or CPS reviewing lawyer has to be
satisfied that both components are passed.

Stuart A. Bronstein

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 5:10:01 PM6/18/13

to

davehe...@example.com (Dave Henderson) wrote:

> However, the demands and threats being made by my neighbour have
> escalated. He has now started making demands about my extension,
> at the rear, and my wall, at the front.

There is no way to determine whether his proposal is fair (though I'd
guess it's not) unless and until you have it surveyed. He says he's
willing to pay half the cost of a solicitor - will he pay half the
cost of a surveyor? I'd guess not. And if not, I'd find that
suspicious.

My suggestion is to do two things as quickly as possible. First,
find your own solicitor and take advice. If your neighbour persists,
you may want to ask for a restraining order to prevent his further
harassment.

Second, get a surveyor to determine exactly where the boundary lines
are. Only then will you be able to determine how to proceed next.

Unfortunately these are sometimes the costs of home ownership.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 5:55:02 PM6/18/13

to

It would depend on the nature and style of the hedge , some of these
privit hedges take years to grow into the full bodied beasties they
become.

One of my old neighbours hedges were a work of art carefully tendered
by him and his father before him.

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 5:55:10 PM6/18/13

to

It wouldnt have made much difference if you couldnt have supplied it

Robin Bignall

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 8:45:03 PM6/18/13

to

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:10:09 +0100, "Periander" <u...@britwar.couk>
wrote:

Quite. But these days doesn't one have to make some sort of declaration
before selling a house, concerning problems with neighbours? Having
such a neighbour might make a property difficult to sell.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England

Dr Zoidberg

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 2:45:10 AM6/19/13

to

"Dave Henderson" <davehe...@example.com> wrote in message

news:1l4oidq.1gzz6lwksyke4N%davehe...@example.com...

> Dave Henderson <davehe...@example.com> wrote:
>
> Any further comments or advice will be gratefully welcomed.
>

Good luck.
It sounds like you will need it, along with paid legal advice.

--
Alex

Mark Goodge

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 3:20:02 AM6/19/13

to

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:15:05 +0100, Dave Henderson put finger to keyboard
and typed:
>

>My concern now is to ensure that all these other matters don't start
>getting muddled up in the matter of the hedge.
>
>For example, the supposed encroachment of my front garden wall on his
>land (something he has never previously complained about), or his
>complaints about the extension that was there when I bought my house 15
>years ago, or even this crazed notion that I pay him rent each year - I
>have absolutely no intention of agreeing to any of these fantastical
>demands.
>
>I am also concerned about what this fellow may do next, to my wall or
>house or something else. I fear that *whatever* I do, he isn't going to
>be satisfied.
>
>Any further comments or advice will be gratefully welcomed.

I think you have reached the point where getting professional legal advice
is almost unavoidable. It might also be wise to have another word with the
police, as graffiti is criminal damage just as much as hitting a wall with
a sledgehammer.

In the meantime, I think it would also be wise to avoid entering into any
further discussions about either the hedge or the boundary.

It's also worth noting that your neighbour's letter reveals several
misconceptions as to the nature of property law and contracts (for example,
he doesn't seem to know what a "peppercorn rent" is). It's quite possible
that is own solicitor will advise him not to take it any further.

On a wider note, if the surveyor does conclude that the boundary line is
actually your side of the wall and inside the bounds of the extension, then
a far more sensible long term solution is for you to offer to buy the strip
of land from him which contains them rather than paying rent. That would
put an end to it once and for all, whereas with a rental agreement you are
always going to be at the mercy of his whims. But I wouldn't mention that
possibility at all until you have the surveyor's report.

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 3:55:02 AM6/19/13

to

Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

> On a wider note, if the surveyor does conclude that the boundary line is
> actually your side of the wall and inside the bounds of the extension, then
> a far more sensible long term solution is for you to offer to buy the strip
> of land from him which contains them rather than paying rent.

Even if this extension was built 20 years ago, and and no mention of the
issue has been made in the 15 years that the house has been owned?

Daniele

Ian Jackson

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 3:55:09 AM6/19/13

to

In message <xn0ijh6f...@reader80.eternal-september.org>, steve
robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> writes

Whereas mine grows at a prodigious rate. During the growing season, it's
a constant battle to keep it in shape. It has to be cut twice a year
(plus the occasional extra snip at a few enthusiastic bits). Left to its
own devices, some of it is quite capable of growing at least two feet in
a couple of months. If the hedge the OP cut is still 2' high, in a
couple of weeks it almost certainly will suddenly start to re-grow.

About three weeks ago, I started some very serious pruning on my privet,
taking up to 2' 6' feet of the top, and in places over 1' off the width
(ie all of the top and all of one side were bare stems). After a two
week wait, the regeneration started, and now its really beginning to
green up.

I would resist any suggestion that the hedge the OP cut should be
replace by mature hedging. Not only will this be expensive, in the long
run it is almost certainly completely unnecessary. By the time the job
has been done, the original will already be rapidly re-growing.
--
Ian

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 6:30:05 AM6/19/13

to

That's a very good point - many contents policies have a legal advice
and assistance add-on.

It would be a good idea to check this immediately since some policies
specify that you have to give notice of any potential claim within a
strict time limit. I suppose you'd need to check whether such a claim
would affect any future premium.

polygonum

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 6:25:05 AM6/19/13

to

On 19/06/2013 10:55, Norman Wells wrote:
> If the neighbour at the time did not object, it would seem that he
> acquiesced (ie tacitly agreed) to its being built, and to the boundary
> being where the OP thinks it is rather than where the neighbour claims
> it is.

Am trying to follow this but wonder the effect if the extension was
built slightly differently to the plans?

The neighbour at the time might well have acquiesced to the plans but be
unhappy about the actuality.

--
Rod

Chris R

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 6:45:01 AM6/19/13

to

>
>
> "Norman Wells" wrote in message news:j9fwt.138752$ck4....@fx24.fr7...

> The Todal wrote:
>
> > How you reply to him will depend on the facts. Eg
> >
> > "I agree that the wall and extension appear to be three inches over
> > the boundary line, but the work was carried out 13 years ago and I am
> > advised that the law of adverse possession means that you cannot now
> > require me to move or demolish the wall or extension.
>
> Adverse possession has to be claimed. The outcome used to be pretty clear
> if you had adverse possession for 12 years but it no longer is. The Land
> Registration Act 2002 now requires anyone claiming adverse possession to
> give notice to the true landowner, and it's only if he does not object
> that adverse possession can be granted. And with feuding neighbours, the
> chances of that happening are approximately zero.
>

That's not quite the whole story. First, there is an exception for minor
boundary issues, which may well apply in this case: "the squatter has been
in adverse possession of land adjacent to their own under the mistaken but
reasonable belief that they are the owner of it, the exact line of the
boundary with this adjacent land has not been determined and the estate to
which the application relates was registered more than a year prior to the
date of the application."

Secondly, the neighbour has to do more than object in order to defeat the
claim to adverse possession in the long run. He has to actually evict the
encroachment within two years of the claim, which means getting a court
order for the removal of the extension, wall etc. That seems unlikely.

The law is different if the neighbour's title is not registered, or if the
encroachment had already been in place for 12 years on 13 October 2003.
http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/professional/guides/practice-guide-4

--
Chris R

========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======

Percy Picacity

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 7:20:02 AM6/19/13

to

Especially since if it is in their records they can find it, and if it
isn't in their records it is no use to them!

--

Percy Picacity

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 7:20:10 AM6/19/13

to

Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> wrote:

> The Todal wrote:
>
> > How you reply to him will depend on the facts. Eg
> >
> > "I agree that the wall and extension appear to be three inches over
> > the boundary line, but the work was carried out 13 years ago and I am
> > advised that the law of adverse possession means that you cannot now
> > require me to move or demolish the wall or extension.
>
> Adverse possession has to be claimed. The outcome used to be pretty
> clear if you had adverse possession for 12 years but it no longer is.
> The Land Registration Act 2002 now requires anyone claiming adverse
> possession to give notice to the true landowner, and it's only if he
> does not object that adverse possession can be granted. And with
> feuding neighbours, the chances of that happening are approximately
> zero.
>
> It would be well worthwhile going to the Council to inspect the papers
> relating to the planning application for the extension.

Quote from the original query:

At this point he completely lost his temper, saying the the
previous occupant of my house had built an extension - which is
now my study - onto the party wall without planning permission
some twenty years ago.

So there are a number of questions here, of fact and law:

* does the extension in fact encroach on the neighbour's property?
* did it have planning permission; if not, did it need it?
* given that it was built 20 years ago and no objection has been raised
in that time, does it matter any longer anyway?

Daniele

Percy Picacity

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 7:30:02 AM6/19/13

to

On 2013-06-18 20:15:05 +0000, Dave Henderson said:

> snip latest details

>
> My concern now is to ensure that all these other matters don't start
> getting muddled up in the matter of the hedge.
>
> For example, the supposed encroachment of my front garden wall on his
> land (something he has never previously complained about), or his
> complaints about the extension that was there when I bought my house 15
> years ago, or even this crazed notion that I pay him rent each year - I
> have absolutely no intention of agreeing to any of these fantastical
> demands.
>
> I am also concerned about what this fellow may do next, to my wall or
> house or something else. I fear that *whatever* I do, he isn't going to
> be satisfied.
>
> Any further comments or advice will be gratefully welcomed.

That all makes reasonable sense (except that 'litigious' is better than
violent or aggressive, and not necessarily a criticism), but at this
stage you really must get legal advice and *not* write your own letters
to the neighbour or his solicitor. In case you either worsen the
situation or give away something you don't have to. Be polite to the
neighbour and stick to the position that you wish to sort things out to
your mutual satisfaction after consulting a surveyor and a solicitor.
But refuse to express an opinion on the actual issues until your
solicitor has advised you on the basis of a surveyor's report, and then
preferably get the solicitor to review all written communications.

--

Percy Picacity

RobertL

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 8:00:04 AM6/19/13

to

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:10:01 AM UTC+1, The Todal wrote:

> It would probably be much better to meet with him rather than conduct
all discussions by letter.

Actually, I disagree with this. I think it is easier to keep things rational and calm if you communicate only by letter and remain calm. There is then no scope for misunderstanding or reinterpretation as there is with remembered conversations. This is especially so when dealing with someone who seems to have become irrational.

Robert

Martin Bonner

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 9:20:05 AM6/19/13

to

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 1:00:04 PM UTC+1, RobertL wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:10:01 AM UTC+1, The Todal wrote:
> > It would probably be much better to meet with him rather than conduct
> > all discussions by letter.
>
> Actually, I disagree with this.

I agree with Robert here. As a general principle, the Todal is right,
but I think this has already gone too far, and the OP would be better
off the other side of a letter box.

RobertL

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 7:45:02 AM6/19/13

to

On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:30:02 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
> Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In message
>
> > <1l4mtub.1q4r8bdw8wdbuN%real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk>, at 00:00:04 on Tue,
>
> > 18 Jun 2013, D.M. Procida <real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> remarked:
>
> >> The police officers who attended the incident invited me to press
> >> charges for criminal damage. Though I declined to do this, I do
> >> require that the damage you caused to the wall be repaired.

>
> > I thought it was the CPS who made decisions about 'pressing charges'. If
> > they have sufficient evidence they don't need your permission.
>
>
>

> That was my experience last year. Some scrote decided to vandalise one of
> my cars, unaware that a security camera caught him in the act. It was petty
> damage easily fixed and I told plod that if he paid for the repair I would
> forget all about it.

>
>
>
> I wasn't given that option. The police/CPS have decided that there is

> evidence of criminal damage and the CPS are prosecuting. End result is that
> I have, so far, spent about 30 hours being interviewed by the police and
> three days hanging around magistrates' courts waiting for a defendant who
> absents himself. A waste of my time and money and a waste of police and CPS
> resources for something that could have been settled fairly quickly as a
> civil matter.

It's possible he has been on their radar for ages for more serious crimes and they are keen to get a formal conviction on the books to deter him.

Robert

Steve Firth

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 7:45:03 AM6/19/13

to

polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
> On 19/06/2013 10:55, Norman Wells wrote:
>> If the neighbour at the time did not object, it would seem that he
>> acquiesced (ie tacitly agreed) to its being built, and to the boundary
>> being where the OP thinks it is rather than where the neighbour claims
>> it is.
>
> Am trying to follow this but wonder the effect if the extension was built
> slightly differently to the plans?

The issue causes me to consider that the OP has reason to refer to the
solicitor who performed the searches and conveyancing. It is their
responsibility to confirm that the house and extension were constructed
with appropriate consent and within the registered boundaries of the
property.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

Chris R

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 10:10:02 AM6/19/13

to

>
>
> "Steve Firth" wrote in message
> news:579071472393333430.125116%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org...

No, a solicitor is not required to check that the construction is within the
boundaries, and has no practical way of doing so.

In any event, the most likely explanation here is that the neighbour is
wrong in his assumptions about where the boundary lies.

The Todal

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 10:50:01 AM6/19/13

to

As a general rule, people get far more aggressive in their written
communications than they do when they speak face to face. Sometimes it
can be a complaint that "he never talks to me, all I get is these
pompous bloody letters".

Speaking face to face might defuse a difficult situation but the OP
knows his neighbour better than we do, and might feel that a face to
face conversation would rapidly degenerate into a shouting match and
threats of physical violence.

One option perhaps is to arrange a meeting in the presence of a third
party whose job or physical appearance would have the effect of calming
things down. A friend who is a police officer or lawyer, or who works in
a job where he regularly deals with angry customers. Who can act as
referee without taking sides.

Anyway, if you write a letter and it is ignored, that can result in very
aggressive behaviour - banging on walls, damaging postal packets that
the postman delivers to the neighbour when you're out, insulting remarks
when you're in your garden. So it would be a good idea for the OP to
reply to the neighbour by saying (either orally or in a letter) that
you're considering his letter and will get back to him as soon as you can.

Steve Firth

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 12:20:02 PM6/19/13

to

"Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Steve Firth" wrote in message
>> news:579071472393333430.125116%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 19/06/2013 10:55, Norman Wells wrote:
>>>> If the neighbour at the time did not object, it would seem that he
>>>> acquiesced (ie tacitly agreed) to its being built, and to the boundary
>>>> being where the OP thinks it is rather than where the neighbour claims
>>>> it is.
>>>
>>> Am trying to follow this but wonder the effect if the extension was
>>> built
>>> slightly differently to the plans?
>>
>> The issue causes me to consider that the OP has reason to refer to the
>> solicitor who performed the searches and conveyancing. It is their
>> responsibility to confirm that the house and extension were constructed
>> with appropriate consent and within the registered boundaries of the
>> property.
>>
> No, a solicitor is not required to check that the construction is within the
> boundaries, and has no practical way of doing so.

There's this list of questions that a competent solicitor sends to the
vendor. The one that I received on selling my previous home required
details of consents given for extensions built and also required assurances
that no boundaries had been infringed by me or my neighbours.

When purchasing the next home our solicitor undertook the same process and
warned us and our building society that a neighbour had built an extension
infringing upon our boundaries. He also, for a fee of course, negotiated
with the neighbour, arranged for the neighbour to demolish and re-site the
offending construction and as a sweetener for the neighbour arranged for us
to buy a small piece of land from the neighbour to tidy up the boundaries
and offset his construction and demolition costs.

Perhaps I have been fortunate in only encountering diligent and forward
thinking solicitors who see their job as being to work in the best
interests of their client. However I had assumed that this level of
checking was what solicitors do.

> In any event, the most likely explanation here is that the neighbour is
> wrong in his assumptions about where the boundary lies.

But surely it would do no harm to make an enquiry about these matters to
the solicitor who did the conveyancing, particularly as the OP appears to
require the services of a solicitor to sort things out?

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

Dave Henderson

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 1:55:02 PM6/19/13

to

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:

>
> The bottom line is, his threat to go to law is a hollow one. His first
> step is to obtain advice from a solicitor. The solicitor would then
> write to you. Depending on what he says and what evidence he produces,
> you can consider whether to make concessions or to pay a solicitor to
> advise or represent you (probably better to pay for advice but write
> your own letters, it's so much cheaper).
>
> No solicitor would start court proceedings against you without giving
> you plenty of time to consider your position. Your neighbour might do
> so, acting as a litigant in person.

Thank you so very much for this; really appreciated. Never would have
thought that this could result in so much stress and sleeplessness - its
a hedge - not some elegant topiary in a national garden!

The Todal

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 1:55:09 PM6/19/13

to

On 19/6/13 17:20, Steve Firth wrote:
> "Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Steve Firth" wrote in message
>>> news:579071472393333430.125116%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 19/06/2013 10:55, Norman Wells wrote:
>>>>> If the neighbour at the time did not object, it would seem that he
>>>>> acquiesced (ie tacitly agreed) to its being built, and to the boundary
>>>>> being where the OP thinks it is rather than where the neighbour claims
>>>>> it is.
>>>>
>>>> Am trying to follow this but wonder the effect if the extension was
>>>> built
>>>> slightly differently to the plans?
>>>
>>> The issue causes me to consider that the OP has reason to refer to the
>>> solicitor who performed the searches and conveyancing. It is their
>>> responsibility to confirm that the house and extension were constructed
>>> with appropriate consent and within the registered boundaries of the
>>> property.
>>>
>> No, a solicitor is not required to check that the construction is within the
>> boundaries, and has no practical way of doing so.
>
> There's this list of questions that a competent solicitor sends to the
> vendor. The one that I received on selling my previous home required
> details of consents given for extensions built and also required assurances
> that no boundaries had been infringed by me or my neighbours.

In the distant past there were "enquiries before contract" that were
served by the purchaser's solicitor. Nowadays there are "property
information forms" (a main one and sometimes a separate leasehold one)
completed and served by the buyer via his solicitors.

They are in standard form, and occasionally the purchaser's solicitor
will send some supplemental queries.

I've found the basic Property Information Form online:
www.lawsociety.org.uk/advice/documents/TA6-form-specimen/

I don't think it is much help, if the seller is unaware that his
boundaries have moved. It might be, if he definitely knew or ought to
have known that the boundaries have moved. One could sue for
misrepresentation, possibly.

>
> When purchasing the next home our solicitor undertook the same process and
> warned us and our building society that a neighbour had built an extension
> infringing upon our boundaries. He also, for a fee of course, negotiated
> with the neighbour, arranged for the neighbour to demolish and re-site the
> offending construction and as a sweetener for the neighbour arranged for us
> to buy a small piece of land from the neighbour to tidy up the boundaries
> and offset his construction and demolition costs.
>
> Perhaps I have been fortunate in only encountering diligent and forward
> thinking solicitors who see their job as being to work in the best
> interests of their client. However I had assumed that this level of
> checking was what solicitors do.

Not really. I'd be interested to know what your solicitor charged for
all that extra work. It was necessary, it was something he felt able to
handle, and he charged for it. Other solicitors maybe would have been
oblivious of the underlying problem or would not have wanted to take on
any ancillary work.

Usually he'll rely on the surveyor to point out any issues. If the
surveyor says that the boundary appears to be incorrect or that there
has been a new construction and "your solicitor will check whether
permissions have been obtained" that might make him ask more questions.
If it seems clear that something is wrong, he'll see if an additional
deed can put it right.

>
>> In any event, the most likely explanation here is that the neighbour is
>> wrong in his assumptions about where the boundary lies.
>
> But surely it would do no harm to make an enquiry about these matters to
> the solicitor who did the conveyancing, particularly as the OP appears to
> require the services of a solicitor to sort things out?
>

If it was more than 6 years ago it's unlikely that the solicitor will
have the file still. The OP should certainly check all the
correspondence he had with his solicitor. He should have been sent
copies of all property information forms.

Steve Firth

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 2:25:09 PM6/19/13

to

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:
> On 19/6/13 17:20, Steve Firth wrote:

[snip]

>> Perhaps I have been fortunate in only encountering diligent and forward
>> thinking solicitors who see their job as being to work in the best
>> interests of their client. However I had assumed that this level of
>> checking was what solicitors do.
>
> Not really. I'd be interested to know what your solicitor charged for all that extra work.

It was a bit odd, when we went to pay him he asked us how much we wanted to
pay. I pointed out that we had a quotation from him and I rather expected
that we would pay that quotation plus something extra for the additional
work. He reviewed the quote and said that he would charge £200 plus the
fees he had to pay on our behalf.

That was a tiny fraction of his quote and I protested that he should take a
fair amount. He said it was OK and we should treat it as a "welcome to
Hampshire" package. Besides he said his interest was mostly commercial law
and as a professional I would probably use him if he was nice to me. So I
have done since then although he sold his practice to a bigger practice a
few years ago and became a partner so now I get a junior solicitor doing
the boring stuff like reviewing contracts.

I suppose it worked out well for him in the long run.

> It was necessary, it was something he felt able to handle, and he charged
> for it. Other solicitors maybe would have been oblivious of the
> underlying problem or would not have wanted to take on any ancillary work.

He was extremely keen to ensure that things were done properly and
discovered a number of problems. The property had been owned by a charity
and didn't have residential planning consent, one neighbour had grabbed
some land years before which he could do nothing about. Some problems with
rights of way all of which he dealt with.

> Usually he'll rely on the surveyor to point out any issues.

Maybe that was where some of the info came from. We used the SPAB because
the house is old and really needed a specialist survey. He took a lot of
trouble too photographing every room and the internal voids as well as
measuring the boundaries and inspecting the services.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

steve robinson

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 5:15:02 PM6/19/13

to

Yes

D.M. Procida

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 7:30:05 PM6/19/13

to

Dave Henderson <davehe...@example.com> wrote:

<lenthy account of angry neighbour woes>

I was out with a friend this evening, and I mentioned this sorry tale to
him. He is an architect and has encountered his fair share of such
disputes.

His remarks:

You have four separate problems, which your neighbour wants you to
conflate (standard bully practice), but which you must keep quite clear
in your own mind and responses.

First: your *immediate* problem is whether the neighbour is going to do
any damage to your house or property. It's a worry, but that's what the
police are there for. At the first sign of damage being or having been
caused, call the police. Damaging people's property is a criminal
offence; they will act.

On the subject of criminal damage, take some photographs as soon as you
can of your walls and so on, so you have proof in case it's needed of
their current state. Take some pictures of the existing damage.

You may be tempted to respond to some of his demands in order to pacify
him so he doesn't cause any damage. That's natural, but *don't be
tempted to do that.*

The *one exception* is to let him know that you will be responding "in
due course" (preferably via his solicitor).

In short: *do not allow him to bully you into saying or doing anything,
but call the police if necessary*.

The next problems are the wall of the extension, the hedge, and the wall
at the front. So:

Second: whether your extension had planning permission or encroaches on
his land is almost certainly completely irrelevant. It has been like
that for 20 years, and he hasn't complained before. Don't worry about
it. It's not your problem.

In short: *ignore it*.

Third: the hedge and the wall at the front are *maybe* problems for you.
You won't whether they are until a party wall surveyor has told you
exactly where the boundaries are.

Don't do *anything* about either the hedge or the wall until the
surveyor has given his verdict. Don't agree to do anything, and don't
say you will do anything.

(Possibly the neighbour will employ a party wall surveyor too, and their
verdicts may differ, but there is a protocol for resolving this. That's
what party wall surveyors and the system are for.)

Once you have the judgement of a qualified person about where the
boundaries are, you can decide what your problems are.

Best case: he's in the wrong about both and can go and screw himself.

Worst case: it was his hedge, and the wall at the front encroaches on
his property; in this case, wait for his solicitor to be in touch about
them both.

You will get plenty of time to remedy anything that needs to be
remedied.

In short: don't worry about things unless you know you need to. Employ a
party wall surveyor to tell you whether you have inadvertantly destroyed
his hedge or have a wall on his land. If you have, wait for his
solicitor to be in touch.

Fourth: the final problem is that you seem have a first-class dickhead
for a neighbour. That's really bad luck. Not much you can do, except be
aware and in future make sure he knows what you're planning to do so he
can't pretend to be surprised by them.

Keep your distance. Don't get sucked into discussions, especially if
they become shouty. Say: I prefer to respond in writing to your
solicitor.

Finally, make dated notes of *everything* - conversations, incidents,
letters. It's tedious, but records are very valuable. By all means keep
a tape recorder handy, and use it.

So that was what he said. He's an architect, not a lawyer or a party
wall surveyor, but he was very keen on the idea that a party wall
surveyor is the key to what you do next. He reckoned that solicitors
know a lot less about this than party wall surveyors do.

Daniele

Lordgnome

unread,

Jun 20, 2013, 4:10:05 AM6/20/13

to

On 19/06/2013 17:20, Steve Firth wrote:

> "Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:

> Perhaps I have been fortunate in only encountering diligent and forward
> thinking solicitors who see their job as being to work in the best
> interests of their client. However I had assumed that this level of
> checking was what solicitors do.

I had a very enthusiastic solicitor on one occasion, who was so
determined to exactly establish the property details, that we spent a
morning climbing over fences to view the place from every perspective!

Les.

unread,

Jun 21, 2013, 1:30:02 AM6/21/13

to

Wasn't the extension built before the op moved in ?