DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Non-motoring legal advice
*****************************************************
#Post#: 93383--------------------------------------------------
Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminology?
By: JoCo Date: October 8, 2025, 9:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If anyone has any advice, I would be grateful. My father in law
is having a bit of problems with the neighbours with respect to
boundaries.
His house was newly built 60 years ago on what was pasture, and
the boundary was a hedgerow. This area of the garden is an
orchard, at far end of property.
Anyway the end by the neighbours had become to be honest a bit
unkempt, with a lot a brambles, nettles and bindweed. The hedge
had died or was leggy. So I can understand the neighbours might
have been a bit miffed. Their end of the garden was no longer
secure, and they had to deal with spread of weeds. So far so
understandable (Although they did trespass to do so)
Anyway one day we came out to find that much of the hedge had
been removed and they had planted a row of laurel inside our
property line!
My wife challenged them, and they maintained that they have the
correct boundary, and the hedge was put on the boundary. They
have since moved some of the hedge to be "within the boundary"
as a "concession", but we regard as being on our land.
There was a lot of nastiness (They called my wife a F** B**ch)
when she challenged them. So she doesn't want to "have another
chat and sort it out"; that boat has sailed.
My father in law thinks the hedge is his. But when I asked, I
found that it was not planted by him and was the original
hedgerow. The deeds show nothing.
I'm trying to put this to bed.
I am taking it that the midpoint of hedge is the boundary. On
the basis that that is the normal situation for a hedgerow
unless there's a ditch.
My wife wrote to them , showing a copy of plan of our deeds and
theirs (downloaded from land registry), which to me supported
our claim of where the boundary was, and that their hedge was a
trespass. The plans for the two properties showing boundary were
slightly different, and I reminded them that the plan was a
‘graphical representation which only shows the general position
of the boundary’ a line I lifted - but didn't credit - from Land
Registry website.
We said we intended to resolve situation by putting up a timber
fence, at our expense, on boundary*, so garden is secure. We
would give them the benefit of the doubt where the lines
differed to their advantage, but would mainly be using the line
of hedging and my father-in-law's knowledge, as the original and
only ever owner. We gave them 2 weeks to respond with any
objections.
* I now realise this was a tactical mistake. As putting up a
fence on the boundary requires their permission, whereas not so
if boundary is wholly on our property.
They replied with section of a copy of their Deeds, copper plate
script from 1931, as follows;
In these it clearly states that the 2 side boundaries of our
property each measure 150ft. This is obviously more accurate
information than the ‘graphical representation which only shows
the general position of the boundary’, as you pointed out in
your letter.
They then go on to say that they spent a lot of time measuring
the distance, putting stakes in ground, to determine distance
and boundary.
We very much dispute your statement that we have now planted a
hedge on your father’s property, all the roots of our laurels
are our side of the boundary.
We do object to you giving us an ultimatum – an agreement
between us needs to be reached before any work takes place. We
are going abroad later this month and will obviously have to
take action if we return and find that you have erected a fence.
We have already spoken to solicitors who deal with boundary
disputes and they are ready to act on our behalf if and when
necessary.
We hope that our evidence has made the situation clearer, and we
are hoping we can agree that you either completely remove the
hedge and replace it with a fence on an agreed boundary line or
we would not object to a newly planted hedge on the agreed
boundary line.
We would be open to having a planned meeting with you to discuss
this situation or I understand there are Boundary Disputes
Mediation services which can help in these circumstances.
--------------
That sounds conciliatory but here's the interesting thing:
Their deeds do not state this! The deeds say measurement is an
approximation! We believe their 150 foot gotcha has no legal
merit. To save repeating myself I quote below the relevant
section of the letter I have drafted in response:
With respect to your deeds from 1931. You have severely
misrepresented this document. You state categorically “In these
it clearly states that the 2 side boundaries of our property
each measure 150ft”. In fact the document states no such thing.
The relevant section defines “a depth throughout of One Hundred
and Fifty Feet or thereabouts”. You omitted the key piece of
information that the measurement was an approximation and not an
exact figure as you asserted.
You also state: “This is obviously more accurate information
than the ‘graphical representation which only shows the general
position of the boundary”. Again this is a misrepresentation of
the title deeds. The relevant section defines the measurements
with the caveat “or thereabouts” then explains this is “more
particularly delineated and described on the plan”. That is to
say that the plan is considered more important than the
measurements when defining boundaries. Again this is the exact
opposite of what you assert.
To spell it out, the measurements on the deeds hold less weight
than the plan. And the plan itself only shows the general
position of the boundary. This does NOT grant you the authority
of taking a point at a measured 150 feet and declaring it de
facto as your property, as you seem to imply.
I haven't sent it.
My questions are.
Is that too strong?
Am I correct translating the legal terminology "Or Thereabouts"
and "more particularly delineated...".
Would you consider their claim that "it clearly states that the
2 side boundaries of our property each measure 150ft" as a
serious misrepresentation of the title document, or an
acceptable emphasis on the point which supports their claim?
Our current position is that we want to build a fence entirely
on our land, not on the boundary and not involve them. Hence
normally would not need their permission. However we believe
that their laurel hedge is on our property. Its based on a
measurement which has no merit in our eyes. So we would need to
reclaim that land.
We are only talking a foot or two, and the hedge saplings are
young.
Is this unwise, without agreement, to just go ahead given that
they dispute the boundary?
So how to progress? I am tempted to trap them, by asking them to
confirm that they are basing their boundary on the 150 foot
clause in deeds rather than any physical barrier. And keep my
powder dry about the approximation clause.
And should I mention Adverse possession? If their garden was
indeed 150 foot, and we had overlapped their land. Wouldn't this
be ours by adverse possession?
Any advise is gratefully accepted. It seems a simple dispute,
which could/should have been sorted out amicably in the ideal
world. But as the man said when asked for directions "Well, I
wouldn't have started from here!".
My father in law is 93 and very upset that "they are stealing my
land". We don't really want to get solicitors involved, both for
financial and stress reasons.
But would you advise it?
Has anyone used the legal services of Which magazine? Is that
worth the £50 or so?
#Post#: 93387--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: andy_foster Date: October 8, 2025, 10:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
gardenlaw.co.uk
#Post#: 93388--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: JoCo Date: October 8, 2025, 10:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=andy_foster link=topic=8330.msg93387#msg93387
date=1759935983]
gardenlaw.co.uk
[/quote]
Thanks , I'll raise a case there.
#Post#: 93409--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: roythebus Date: October 8, 2025, 3:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Do the deeds state where the 150' is measured from? Sometimes
it's the centre line of the road, it can be an adjoining
boundary wall or fence or the edge of the road.
Why fuss so much over a couple of feet of what is in effect
waste land.
#Post#: 93411--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: andy_foster Date: October 8, 2025, 4:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=roythebus link=topic=8330.msg93409#msg93409
date=1759956953]
Why fuss so much over a couple of feet of what is in effect
waste land.
[/quote]
So you won't mind if I help myself to a few feet of your garden?
#Post#: 93456--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: JoCo Date: October 9, 2025, 5:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=roythebus link=topic=8330.msg93409#msg93409
date=1759956953]
Do the deeds state where the 150' is measured from? Sometimes
it's the centre line of the road, it can be an adjoining
boundary wall or fence or the edge of the road.[/quote]
Its from the road. But a bit irrelevant. As my point is that
the measurement (from wherever) is being presented as exact,
whereas the title deeds are less precise, and cede to plan.
Beneficial Owner hereby conveys unto the Purchaser ALL THAT
piece or parcel of land situate [sic] at *** having a frontage
of Fortyne [sic *] Feet or thereabouts to the Main Road... and a
depth throughout of One Hundred and Fifty Feet or thereabouts
which said piece or parcel of land more particularly delineated
and described on the plan
* Side curiosity. I had initially assumed that "Fortyne" as an
archaic term for fourteen, but I cannot find any example of this
spelling in Google. So I now realise it is a typo for forty - as
fourteen feet is too small for width of plot!
Oh and the deeds were typed not written in copperplate script,
as I wrote, but typed. I had mis remembered! I couldn't modify
OP to correct this.
#Post#: 93458--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: JoCo Date: October 9, 2025, 5:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=andy_foster link=topic=8330.msg93411#msg93411
date=1759957428]
[quote author=roythebus link=topic=8330.msg93409#msg93409
date=1759956953]
Why fuss so much over a couple of feet of what is in effect
waste land.
[/quote]
So you won't mind if I help myself to a few feet of your garden?
[/quote]
Exactly
#Post#: 93464--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: JoCo Date: October 9, 2025, 6:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I realise that boundary disputes are a tangled web, and best to
get specialist / experienced advice.
So I have posted this on gardenlaw as suggested by Andy.
But I wonder if any lawyers on here can help me with one of my
queries in the general:
Would you consider a claim such as "it clearly states that the 2
side boundaries of our property each measure 150ft" as a serious
misrepresentation of the title document, or an acceptable
emphasis on the point which supports their claim?
I'm inclined to the former. But I'm biased. Perhaps there's
supposed to be such to and fro.
#Post#: 93490--------------------------------------------------
Re: Anyone have any experience with border disputes and terminol
ogy?
By: Southpaw82 Date: October 9, 2025, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
“Situate” isn’t an error. “Situated” is a later adaptation.
*****************************************************