Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Boundary Fence

including wills and probate
bruncher
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1163
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:20 pm
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 297 times

Boundary Fence

#420782

Postby bruncher » June 19th, 2021, 6:02 pm

I'm in the middle of discussions with the freeholder of the adjoining semi-detached house.

Five weeks ago, contractors arrived and started dismantling the fence between my house and the adjoining house - which is owned by a Housing Association and has new tenants.

I was not notified or consulted about the work. The contractors told me they had been instructed to install a 6 ft fence to replace the lower approx 4 - 5 ft existing fence. The existing fence is unusually well-made - concrete board with upright posts which have grooves or slots into which timber panels slide into the slots between the posts and sit on the concrete boards. The contractors proposed to cut the concrete posts and put up a more standard slatted or feathered fence against the concrete board. That sounded like a mess to me, and the two guys agreed that it was wrong I wasn't consulted, and they therefore stopped work on the fence. They tried to put it back together, but had already cause a lot of damage. Two of the panels are too damaged to put back.

I wrote a letter to the Chief Exec of the Housing Association and was contacted by property managers who agreed with me that destroying a solid fence was unreasonable. Two weeks ago, the property manager responsible (who had been on leave) attended the site together with a maintenance manager. They have not yet agreed to remedy the situation. Instead, they have become interested in who is responsible for the fence. One or both of them actually said to me "we think it's yours".

We agreed to look into that. They have come back and said that the Land Registry plans do not make it clear, and what info have I got?

Well, I have two things so far: firstly the seller from whom we purchased the house states on the Law Society Form that the fence in question is maintained by next door; secondly the Land Registry record may contradict that. The plan does not show a 'T', but there is a note stating that "a T mark affects the northern bondary (sic)" which is the boundary in question.

I have discussed the fence with the new tenants who agree that the fence was OK and it would be ridiculous to destroy such a strong robust structure.

At this point, I feel that there are two issues:

Regardless of ownership, the Housing Association needs to make good the fence, since they have damaged it. This needs to be done ASAP as the smashed panels are lying on the ground, and other panels have damage. I think they need to replace ALL the panels so that the fence has integrity.

The question of who is responsible seems to be a separate issue.

Comments welcome.

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420788

Postby pje16 » June 19th, 2021, 6:43 pm

every house I have lived in (4) the fence on the left hand side has been my responsibilty
but that might be chance
there's good info here
https://www.admiral.com/magazine/guides ... nsible-for
seems as if you have strong argument for the damge to be rectified by the "cowboys"
Good luck

AsleepInYorkshire
Lemon Half
Posts: 7383
Joined: February 7th, 2017, 9:36 pm
Has thanked: 10514 times
Been thanked: 4659 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420791

Postby AsleepInYorkshire » June 19th, 2021, 7:24 pm

bruncher wrote:I'm in the middle of discussions with the freeholder of the adjoining semi-detached house.

Five weeks ago, contractors arrived and started dismantling the fence between my house and the adjoining house - which is owned by a Housing Association and has new tenants.

I was not notified or consulted about the work. The contractors told me they had been instructed to install a 6 ft fence to replace the lower approx 4 - 5 ft existing fence. The existing fence is unusually well-made - concrete board with upright posts which have grooves or slots into which timber panels slide into the slots between the posts and sit on the concrete boards. The contractors proposed to cut the concrete posts and put up a more standard slatted or feathered fence against the concrete board. That sounded like a mess to me, and the two guys agreed that it was wrong I wasn't consulted, and they therefore stopped work on the fence. They tried to put it back together, but had already cause a lot of damage. Two of the panels are too damaged to put back.

I wrote a letter to the Chief Exec of the Housing Association and was contacted by property managers who agreed with me that destroying a solid fence was unreasonable. Two weeks ago, the property manager responsible (who had been on leave) attended the site together with a maintenance manager. They have not yet agreed to remedy the situation. Instead, they have become interested in who is responsible for the fence. One or both of them actually said to me "we think it's yours".

We agreed to look into that. They have come back and said that the Land Registry plans do not make it clear, and what info have I got?

Well, I have two things so far: firstly the seller from whom we purchased the house states on the Law Society Form that the fence in question is maintained by next door; secondly the Land Registry record may contradict that. The plan does not show a 'T', but there is a note stating that "a T mark affects the northern bondary (sic)" which is the boundary in question.

I have discussed the fence with the new tenants who agree that the fence was OK and it would be ridiculous to destroy such a strong robust structure.

At this point, I feel that there are two issues:

Regardless of ownership, the Housing Association needs to make good the fence, since they have damaged it. This needs to be done ASAP as the smashed panels are lying on the ground, and other panels have damage. I think they need to replace ALL the panels so that the fence has integrity.

The question of who is responsible seems to be a separate issue.

Comments welcome.

The letter T with the "bottom end of the T" pointing to a fence denotes who's fence it is.

A      B
|
| -|
|

Fence belongs to B.

I'm staggered that a Housing Association doesn't know what is and isn't it's property. I'm absolutely shocked that they haven't contacted you about the work. Simple courtesy to start with. I'm guessing if you tried to do the same with one of their fences they would not be very happy.

Regardless of who owns the fence it needs to be put right promptly. I'd suggest you take photographs of the damage and send them to anyone within the HA who can make a decision to repair the fence. If it is your fence they really should be given a time boundary within which to close out the works. Following which you can put the works right at their expense. Albeit I'd avoid this if you can.

Poor management?

AiY

Mike88
Lemon Slice
Posts: 969
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:17 pm
Has thanked: 112 times
Been thanked: 271 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420805

Postby Mike88 » June 19th, 2021, 8:44 pm

I would much rather have a 6ft fence between my property and one owned by a Housing Association. I have had troublesome neighbours with tenants of a Housing Association in my very first property and, given the OP has zero control who resides in a property owned by a Housing Association, the higher the fence the better.

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3523
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 1546 times
Been thanked: 1402 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420812

Postby moorfield » June 19th, 2021, 9:08 pm

Mike88 wrote:, given the OP has zero control who resides in a property owned by a Housing Association, the higher the fence the better.


and electrified, preferably.

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420814

Postby pje16 » June 19th, 2021, 9:13 pm

moorfield wrote:and electrified, preferably.

I know some who did that as the local tramps (back in the day) were ripping panels off the battens for their fires in an old disused powerhouse
Onec it was "plugged in" the fence stayed in place :lol:

AsleepInYorkshire
Lemon Half
Posts: 7383
Joined: February 7th, 2017, 9:36 pm
Has thanked: 10514 times
Been thanked: 4659 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420816

Postby AsleepInYorkshire » June 19th, 2021, 9:28 pm

pje16 wrote:
moorfield wrote:and electrified, preferably.

I know some who did that as the local tramps (back in the day) were ripping panels off the battens for their fires in an old disused powerhouse
Once it was "plugged in" the fence stayed in place :lol:

And the power plant was nicked :lol:

AiY

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3523
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 1546 times
Been thanked: 1402 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420817

Postby moorfield » June 19th, 2021, 9:36 pm

pje16 wrote:
moorfield wrote:and electrified, preferably.

I know some who did that as the local tramps (back in the day) were ripping panels off the battens for their fires in an old disused powerhouse
Onec it was "plugged in" the fence stayed in place :lol:


Need a lot of voltage though. Lady M's horses are forever crashing through their fences and they are 3000V (I think).

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420819

Postby pje16 » June 19th, 2021, 9:59 pm

moorfield wrote:Need a lot of voltage though. Lady M's horses are forever crashing through their fences and they are 3000V (I think).

Methinks horses feel it less than humans, it did the job anyway ;)

AF62
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3499
Joined: November 27th, 2016, 8:45 am
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 1277 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#420958

Postby AF62 » June 20th, 2021, 3:53 pm

bruncher wrote:Comments welcome.


Well you need to find out who is responsible for that boundary as that is probably (but not always) the person the fence belongs to.

If the fence belongs to the Housing Association then they can do whatever they want with it unless there is some sort of covenant requiring a fence or a specific type of fence.

They can replace it with something else, remove it completely, leave it a mess (provided it isn't dangerous) - whatever they want to do and there is nothing you can do about their choice. Lots of people have the mistaken view that there is a requirement to install or maintain a fence if the boundary belongs to you; there isn't. All you could do if they didn't want to do something to your satisfaction is install a fence yourself on your side of the boundary.

If the fence is yours then the contractors have damaged your fence and unless they agree to replace it as it was at their cost then your could take legal action against them, and a hint that you might report them for criminal damage might spur them into action (although whether the police would be interested is another matter).

bruncher
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1163
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:20 pm
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 297 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#421122

Postby bruncher » June 21st, 2021, 11:13 am

AsleepInYorkshire wrote:
bruncher wrote:I'm in the middle of discussions with the freeholder of the adjoining semi-detached house.

Five weeks ago, contractors arrived and started dismantling the fence between my house and the adjoining house - which is owned by a Housing Association and has new tenants.

I was not notified or consulted about the work. The contractors told me they had been instructed to install a 6 ft fence to replace the lower approx 4 - 5 ft existing fence. The existing fence is unusually well-made - concrete board with upright posts which have grooves or slots into which timber panels slide into the slots between the posts and sit on the concrete boards. The contractors proposed to cut the concrete posts and put up a more standard slatted or feathered fence against the concrete board. That sounded like a mess to me, and the two guys agreed that it was wrong I wasn't consulted, and they therefore stopped work on the fence. They tried to put it back together, but had already cause a lot of damage. Two of the panels are too damaged to put back.

I wrote a letter to the Chief Exec of the Housing Association and was contacted by property managers who agreed with me that destroying a solid fence was unreasonable. Two weeks ago, the property manager responsible (who had been on leave) attended the site together with a maintenance manager. They have not yet agreed to remedy the situation. Instead, they have become interested in who is responsible for the fence. One or both of them actually said to me "we think it's yours".

We agreed to look into that. They have come back and said that the Land Registry plans do not make it clear, and what info have I got?

Well, I have two things so far: firstly the seller from whom we purchased the house states on the Law Society Form that the fence in question is maintained by next door; secondly the Land Registry record may contradict that. The plan does not show a 'T', but there is a note stating that "a T mark affects the northern bondary (sic)" which is the boundary in question.

I have discussed the fence with the new tenants who agree that the fence was OK and it would be ridiculous to destroy such a strong robust structure.

At this point, I feel that there are two issues:

Regardless of ownership, the Housing Association needs to make good the fence, since they have damaged it. This needs to be done ASAP as the smashed panels are lying on the ground, and other panels have damage. I think they need to replace ALL the panels so that the fence has integrity.

The question of who is responsible seems to be a separate issue.

Comments welcome.

The letter T with the "bottom end of the T" pointing to a fence denotes who's fence it is.

A      B
|
| -|
|

Fence belongs to B.

I'm staggered that a Housing Association doesn't know what is and isn't it's property. I'm absolutely shocked that they haven't contacted you about the work. Simple courtesy to start with. I'm guessing if you tried to do the same with one of their fences they would not be very happy.

Regardless of who owns the fence it needs to be put right promptly. I'd suggest you take photographs of the damage and send them to anyone within the HA who can make a decision to repair the fence. If it is your fence they really should be given a time boundary within which to close out the works. Following which you can put the works right at their expense. Albeit I'd avoid this if you can.

Poor management?

AiY


Thanks AiY

The Housing Association have this morning said they will replace the damaged panels, but not the whole fence, which would mean the fence will look like a patchwork. There are only 10 panels in total!

Regarding the letter 'T' on plans, the only plan we have from the Land Registry is a very small plan of the plot and the the surrounding plots. No 'T' is visible, but there is a note stating that "a T mark affects the northern bondary (sic)" which is the boundary in question. Can this note be relied on?

AsleepInYorkshire
Lemon Half
Posts: 7383
Joined: February 7th, 2017, 9:36 pm
Has thanked: 10514 times
Been thanked: 4659 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#421129

Postby AsleepInYorkshire » June 21st, 2021, 11:40 am

bruncher wrote:
Thanks AiY

The Housing Association have this morning said they will replace the damaged panels, but not the whole fence, which would mean the fence will look like a patchwork. There are only 10 panels in total!

Regarding the letter 'T' on plans, the only plan we have from the Land Registry is a very small plan of the plot and the the surrounding plots. No 'T' is visible, but there is a note stating that "a T mark affects the northern bondary (sic)" which is the boundary in question. Can this note be relied on?


Can you scan the Land Registry plan and put it on imgur to display the image here please?

I can't say for sure but my current "guess" is the Housing Association are "negotiating", possibly at your expense.

If it's your fence they should repair it completely. An offer to replace the panels falls short of that.

It may be worth considering sending a copy of the Land Registry title to the HA and claim the fence is yours based on the comments on the title? In other words putting the ball of proof back in their court?

AiY

88V8
Lemon Half
Posts: 5769
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 4098 times
Been thanked: 2560 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#426732

Postby 88V8 » July 11th, 2021, 4:11 pm

AF62 wrote:Lots of people have the mistaken view that there is a requirement to install or maintain a fence if the boundary belongs to you;

And there may be. Our previous house was subject to covenant that there be a certain type of wire fence because the adjacent land was at that time agricultural.

Our cottage now has one boundary subject to a similar covenant because the land is agricultural.

Often there is a restriction on boundary height adjacent to the road.

One would need to consult the deeds.

But yes, one would think that ownership of the boundary should be an elementary aspect of a property title.

V8

AF62
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3499
Joined: November 27th, 2016, 8:45 am
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 1277 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#426742

Postby AF62 » July 11th, 2021, 4:38 pm

88V8 wrote:
AF62 wrote:Lots of people have the mistaken view that there is a requirement to install or maintain a fence if the boundary belongs to you;

And there may be. Our previous house was subject to covenant that there be a certain type of wire fence because the adjacent land was at that time agricultural.

Our cottage now has one boundary subject to a similar covenant because the land is agricultural.


But even if that is the case, which is incredibly unusual, the person who benefits from the covenant still needs to take legal action to enforce it - which in the case of new housing estates simply doesn't happen if the development is finished and the developer has no interest in the site any more.

88V8 wrote:Often there is a restriction on boundary height adjacent to the road.


Although a couple of houses near me have got around the planning issue on not having a fence higher than 1 meter if the boundary is next to a road, by simply keeping the existing 1 metre wall on the boundary but then having a 2 metre high fence set back about 1/2 metre into their land.

88V8 wrote:
One would need to consult the deeds.


Agree.

Allitnil
Lemon Pip
Posts: 54
Joined: February 6th, 2021, 3:13 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#426769

Postby Allitnil » July 11th, 2021, 6:02 pm

AF62 wrote:But even if that is the case, which is incredibly unusual, the person who benefits from the covenant still needs to take legal action to enforce it - which in the case of new housing estates simply doesn't happen if the development is finished and the developer has no interest in the site any more.

A covenant covering the type of fence adjacent to agricultural land could be in favour of the farmer. That was certainly the case where I used to live (although the fields have since been built on). Chatting to the farmer he did say that someone put up a non-stock proof fence but he didn't need to take any action since his cattle already had :lol:

AF62 wrote:Although a couple of houses near me have got around the planning issue on not having a fence higher than 1 meter if the boundary is next to a road, by simply keeping the existing 1 metre wall on the boundary but then having a 2 metre high fence set back about 1/2 metre into their land.

That's a potentially risky approach since there is no definition of "adjacent to the highway". https://www.planningresource.co.uk/arti ... ection-434 suggests that in at least one scenario it was deemed non-permitted development:

In a written representations enforcement appeal decision from Swale in Kent a wall which was 3.43m from the edge of a footpath was considered to be "adjacent" to the highway and therefore at over one metre in height was not permitted development. Here a front garden was long and an inspector reasoned that the wall appeared visually and physically near to the road and formed the principal enclosure of the front garden. A lower wall of less than one metre located in front of the one in contention was disregarded as a decorative and subservient feature. This feature curved away from each end of the wall the subject of the notice to run close to the rear edge of the footpath. The appeal was dismissed on grounds of harm to the street scene which was not outweighed by security considerations, and it is of interest that a plea under the Human Rights Act 1998 was rejected.

88V8
Lemon Half
Posts: 5769
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 4098 times
Been thanked: 2560 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#426998

Postby 88V8 » July 12th, 2021, 12:17 pm

Allitnil wrote:A covenant covering the type of fence adjacent to agricultural land could be in favour of the farmer. That was certainly the case where I used to live (although the fields have since been built on). Chatting to the farmer he did say that someone put up a non-stock proof fence but he didn't need to take any action since his cattle already had.

What I didn't realise is that such covenants are generally to protect the livestock. Not only the obvious risk of them getting onto the road, but the risk that they'll get into a garden and eat something that's poisonous to them.

Our adjacent farmer still laments the loss of two rams that came into our garden under former ownership and ate something that 'blew them up like a balloon'.
The former owner on the other hand recalled the time when some steers got in and trampled and ate various parts of it.

But then, the former owners were intent on pretending that the farmer was responsible for the c600 ft of boundary and never did anything to maintain it.

V8

Mike88
Lemon Slice
Posts: 969
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:17 pm
Has thanked: 112 times
Been thanked: 271 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#427011

Postby Mike88 » July 12th, 2021, 12:40 pm

I remain unclear why the OP does not want a boundary fence to be replaced by a higher fence especially if the fence in question borders a Housing Association property. Furthermore why would anyone argue to have responsibility for a boundary fence when an owner of a neighbouring property is accepting responsibility for it? Arguing the toss will only achieve living with a lower a fence and being responsible for its maintenance.

I had the misfortune of living next door to Housing Association/Council tenants and a higher fence might have prevented the feral children from climbing into my garden and lobbing earth at my bedroom window at an ungodly hour as well as various other incidents which eventually forced me to move.

Dod101
The full Lemon
Posts: 16629
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 4343 times
Been thanked: 7534 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#427021

Postby Dod101 » July 12th, 2021, 1:16 pm

88V8 wrote:
AF62 wrote:Lots of people have the mistaken view that there is a requirement to install or maintain a fence if the boundary belongs to you;

And there may be. Our previous house was subject to covenant that there be a certain type of wire fence because the adjacent land was at that time agricultural.

Our cottage now has one boundary subject to a similar covenant because the land is agricultural.

Often there is a restriction on boundary height adjacent to the road.

One would need to consult the deeds.

But yes, one would think that ownership of the boundary should be an elementary aspect of a property title.

V8


How can anyone own a boundary? A boundary is a boundary is a boundary. You could have a responsibility for marking it I suppose and certainly for maintaining say a boundary fence, but own a boundary? I don't think so.

Dod

AF62
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3499
Joined: November 27th, 2016, 8:45 am
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 1277 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#427029

Postby AF62 » July 12th, 2021, 1:23 pm

Dod101 wrote:
88V8 wrote:
AF62 wrote:Lots of people have the mistaken view that there is a requirement to install or maintain a fence if the boundary belongs to you;

And there may be. Our previous house was subject to covenant that there be a certain type of wire fence because the adjacent land was at that time agricultural.

Our cottage now has one boundary subject to a similar covenant because the land is agricultural.

Often there is a restriction on boundary height adjacent to the road.

One would need to consult the deeds.

But yes, one would think that ownership of the boundary should be an elementary aspect of a property title.

V8


How can anyone own a boundary? A boundary is a boundary is a boundary. You could have a responsibility for marking it I suppose and certainly for maintaining say a boundary fence, but own a boundary? I don't think so.

Dod


Well you own the boundary because you own the fence on it, as opposed to the other fences surrounding your property where you don't own the fence.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2540
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Boundary Fence

#427170

Postby jfgw » July 12th, 2021, 7:32 pm

AF62 wrote:Well you own the boundary because you own the fence on it, as opposed to the other fences surrounding your property where you don't own the fence.

If you own the fence, it should be on your side of the boundary. The boundary is where your land meets your neighbour's land and has zero width.


Julian F. G. W.


Return to “Legal Issues (Practical)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests