I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.

We have obtained the relevant documents from the last conveyance of
the property in 1998 together with annotated copies of the 1:1250
Ordnance Survey map from the Land Registry.

From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on.

On 28 May, 21:24, Bruce wrote:
From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. *They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? *I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on. *

It's not uncommon for there to be no mention of boundary ownership in
the deeds and unfortunately it's a grey area with no obvious answer.
In the absence of any clear evidence then there is a presumption that
they are party boundaries, but this can be rebutted a number of ways
such as one party maintaining a boundary over a period of time. There
is no point in carry out a local authority search as this will not
reveal any information with regard to the boundary. Equally the Land
Registry are not interested in ownership issues unless there is a deed
detailing ownership.

I am not an expert so cannot advice you in any great detail, but hope
this has been of some help!

On Fri, 28 May 2010 13:36:47 -0700 (PDT), geoffr
wrote:

On 28 May, 21:24, Bruce wrote:
From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. *They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? *I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on. *

It's not uncommon for there to be no mention of boundary ownership in
the deeds and unfortunately it's a grey area with no obvious answer.
In the absence of any clear evidence then there is a presumption that
they are party boundaries, but this can be rebutted a number of ways
such as one party maintaining a boundary over a period of time. There
is no point in carry out a local authority search as this will not
reveal any information with regard to the boundary. Equally the Land
Registry are not interested in ownership issues unless there is a deed
detailing ownership.

I am not an expert so cannot advice you in any great detail, but hope
this has been of some help!

On Fri, 28 May 2010 13:36:47 -0700 (PDT), geoffr
wrote:

On 28 May, 21:24, Bruce wrote:
From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. *They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? *I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on. *

It's not uncommon for there to be no mention of boundary ownership in
the deeds and unfortunately it's a grey area with no obvious answer.
In the absence of any clear evidence then there is a presumption that
they are party boundaries, but this can be rebutted a number of ways
such as one party maintaining a boundary over a period of time. There
is no point in carry out a local authority search as this will not
reveal any information with regard to the boundary. Equally the Land
Registry are not interested in ownership issues unless there is a deed
detailing ownership.

I am not an expert so cannot advice you in any great detail, but hope
this has been of some help!


Thanks Geoff. That was helpful as you described the situation very
succinctly.

In message , Bruce
writes
I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.

We have obtained the relevant documents from the last conveyance of
the property in 1998 together with annotated copies of the 1:1250
Ordnance Survey map from the Land Registry.

From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on.

Silly question... why is it important?

If a new owner wishes to erect a boundary having more width than a chain
link fence (brick wall) perhaps he should erect it on his own land?

I think the agricultural assumption is that you fence your own livestock
so the actual ownership of a *fence* could vary. Hedges and ditches are
a special case where it is assumed you threw the soil from the boundary
ditch onto your land and then planted the hedge on top. Confusingly,
land can be sold by the fences:-)

The paper deeds might still exist. My solicitors still hold documents
for land we registered when it was first necessary.

The previous owners might know something.

IANAL

regards



--
Tim Lamb

On 28/05/2010 21:24, Bruce wrote:
I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.

We have obtained the relevant documents from the last conveyance of
the property in 1998 together with annotated copies of the 1:1250
Ordnance Survey map from the Land Registry.

From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

My experience is that the T marks found on original deeds do not
transfer to the Land Registry maps. IANAL but it is my understanding
that these days at least the legal profession do not consider such marks
conclusive and only accept written confirmation in the deeds. My
northern boundary is so identified but the other 3 sides are not.

When it suits him my neighbour (a small farmer) claims that his dry
stone wall boundaries are in common ownership between himself and the
appropriate neighbours. The original maps with his deeds told a
different story for some of the walls but now his property is registered
the LR maps don't reflect that distinction.

snip

In message , Bruce
writes
I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.

We have obtained the relevant documents from the last conveyance of
the property in 1998 together with annotated copies of the 1:1250
Ordnance Survey map from the Land Registry.

From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on.

I thought that by convention, looking from the front of the house to the
rear, the property's boundary fence is the one on the LHS

and

the owner of the boundary wall or fence would have the support facing
his property

not definitive of course


--
geoff

In article ,
geoff writes:
I thought that by convention, looking from the front of the house to the
rear, the property's boundary fence is the one on the LHS

I hadn't heard of that, but it's true of the two houses I've owned.

the owner of the boundary wall or fence would have the support facing
his property

This is sometimes used to define an unknown/disputed boundary.
The significant point is that the boundary is normally a straight
line, and the owner of the fence should have put it on his own land,
so the fence is not crossing the boundary line, and that's normally
done by having the flat side facing away from the fence owner and
any supporting structure on the owner's side. If you put it up
the other way around, you are fencing yourself off from your
own land.

There are cases where owners erect fences the wrong way around
(wanting the flat, and often more pretty side facing them), and
this has eventually lost them the fence and the land it's on in
a later dispute, where the boundary is redefined to be the flat
face of the fence (or wall), so don't be tempted to erect your
fence/wall the wrong way around just so you can't see the
structural side.

not definitive of course

There aren't hard and fast rules which apply to every case.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Bruce wrote:
I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.

We have obtained the relevant documents from the last conveyance of
the property in 1998 together with annotated copies of the 1:1250
Ordnance Survey map from the Land Registry.

From previous experience, I had hoped to find ticks or v-marks showing
which boundaries were the responsibility of which landowners. However,
in this case, the map shows nothing, just a solid line for each fence
and a dotted line for an unfenced but defined boundary, with no ticks.

There is nothing helpful on the ground either, with 3' or 4' plastic
coated chain link fences marking all the boundaries and no hint of
which side the posts are on.

The neighbours on each side are friendly and helpful but no-one knows
who "owns" which boundary. They do know who installed what length of
fence and when, but without prejudice to whose responsibility the
boundaries might be.

So where do I go from here? I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on.

see Party Wall Act


NT

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Bruce
saying something like:

I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.

Was the whole terrace built at the same time? If so, your answer is
there. Get doorknocking from one end to the other and find out what the
end owners maintain. For example, the leftmost house might only have
responsibility for the leftmost fence and their rh neighbours so, and so
on. The unlucky bugger at the far end on the right might have to do two
fences, but that's tough titty.

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff writes:
I thought that by convention, looking from the front of the house
to the
rear, the property's boundary fence is the one on the LHS

I hadn't heard of that, but it's true of the two houses I've owned.

the owner of the boundary wall or fence would have the support
facing
his property

This is sometimes used to define an unknown/disputed boundary.
The significant point is that the boundary is normally a straight
line, and the owner of the fence should have put it on his own land,
so the fence is not crossing the boundary line, and that's normally
done by having the flat side facing away from the fence owner and
any supporting structure on the owner's side. If you put it up
the other way around, you are fencing yourself off from your
own land.

There are cases where owners erect fences the wrong way around
(wanting the flat, and often more pretty side facing them), and
this has eventually lost them the fence and the land it's on in
a later dispute, where the boundary is redefined to be the flat
face of the fence (or wall), so don't be tempted to erect your
fence/wall the wrong way around just so you can't see the
structural side.

not definitive of course

There aren't hard and fast rules which apply to every case.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

It's odd that but I've always prefered the appearance of the
'structural' side - perhaps it's because I'm an engineer and not an
artist !

AWEM

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff writes:
I thought that by convention, looking from the front of the house to the
rear, the property's boundary fence is the one on the LHS

I hadn't heard of that, but it's true of the two houses I've owned.

the owner of the boundary wall or fence would have the support facing
his property

This is sometimes used to define an unknown/disputed boundary.
The significant point is that the boundary is normally a straight
line, and the owner of the fence should have put it on his own land,
so the fence is not crossing the boundary line, and that's normally
done by having the flat side facing away from the fence owner and
any supporting structure on the owner's side. If you put it up
the other way around, you are fencing yourself off from your
own land.

There are cases where owners erect fences the wrong way around
(wanting the flat, and often more pretty side facing them), and
this has eventually lost them the fence and the land it's on in

The reason for putting the structural side of a fence facing the owners
land has nothing to do with defining ownership of fence or boundary. If the
structural side is placed facing outwards it provides easy clambering for
univited guests. Thus the structural side traditionally faces inwards.

mark

In message , mark
writes

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff writes:
I thought that by convention, looking from the front of the house to the
rear, the property's boundary fence is the one on the LHS

I hadn't heard of that, but it's true of the two houses I've owned.

the owner of the boundary wall or fence would have the support facing
his property

This is sometimes used to define an unknown/disputed boundary.
The significant point is that the boundary is normally a straight
line, and the owner of the fence should have put it on his own land,
so the fence is not crossing the boundary line, and that's normally
done by having the flat side facing away from the fence owner and
any supporting structure on the owner's side. If you put it up
the other way around, you are fencing yourself off from your
own land.

There are cases where owners erect fences the wrong way around
(wanting the flat, and often more pretty side facing them), and
this has eventually lost them the fence and the land it's on in

The reason for putting the structural side of a fence facing the owners
land has nothing to do with defining ownership of fence or boundary. If the
structural side is placed facing outwards it provides easy clambering for
univited guests. Thus the structural side traditionally faces inwards.

So yon swagman ( stripy T-shirt, mask and brown sack over his shoulder),
already in next door's garden might think - lets not bother with this
house, the cash might be greener next door - ooh look, there's a
supporting structure we can clamber over ... lets go

or not

that must be a shortrunner for the dennis of the week award

--
geoff

"geoff" wrote in message
...
In message , mark
writes

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff writes:
I thought that by convention, looking from the front of the house to
the
rear, the property's boundary fence is the one on the LHS

I hadn't heard of that, but it's true of the two houses I've owned.

the owner of the boundary wall or fence would have the support facing
his property

This is sometimes used to define an unknown/disputed boundary.
The significant point is that the boundary is normally a straight
line, and the owner of the fence should have put it on his own land,
so the fence is not crossing the boundary line, and that's normally
done by having the flat side facing away from the fence owner and
any supporting structure on the owner's side. If you put it up
the other way around, you are fencing yourself off from your
own land.

There are cases where owners erect fences the wrong way around
(wanting the flat, and often more pretty side facing them), and
this has eventually lost them the fence and the land it's on in

The reason for putting the structural side of a fence facing the owners
land has nothing to do with defining ownership of fence or boundary. If
the
structural side is placed facing outwards it provides easy clambering for
univited guests. Thus the structural side traditionally faces inwards.

So yon swagman ( stripy T-shirt, mask and brown sack over his shoulder),
already in next door's garden might think - lets not bother with this
house, the cash might be greener next door - ooh look, there's a
supporting structure we can clamber over ... lets go

or not

that must be a shortrunner for the dennis of the week award

That's a bit harsh! :-(

"geoff" wrote in message
...

that must be a shortrunner for the dennis of the week award

We haven't seen anyone bad enough for the geoff of the week award for ages,
not even drivel could take your award from you.

In message , "dennis@home"
writes


"geoff" wrote in message
...

that must be a shortrunner for the dennis of the week award

We haven't seen anyone bad enough for the geoff of the week award for
ages, not even drivel could take your award from you.

Sorry, we don't have a geoff of the week , just a dennis and a drivel



--
geoff

[Default] On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:24:21 +0100, a certain chimpanzee,
Bruce , randomly hit the keyboard and wrote:

I have been retained to advise on a small project involving a terraced
cottage that was built in 1882. The rear garden is narrow but very
long and I would like to establish who "owns" (or is responsible for)
which boundary.
....
So where do I go from here? I could have searches carried out but I
fear that all they will turn up is the same annotated plans from the
Land Registry, and having spent some money we will be no further on.

Occasionally the written description of the Registry mentions the
boundary, but not very often.

If this is a terrace, the boundary usually is a continuation of the
party wall. In one of my former jobs, I was responsible for drawing up
the deed plans for the sale of Council houses, and we would usually
start from where the centre of the party wall met the external wall.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have I strayed"?

On Sun, 30 May 2010 12:01:27 +0100, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost
wrote:

Occasionally the written description of the Registry mentions the
boundary, but not very often.

If this is a terrace, the boundary usually is a continuation of the
party wall. In one of my former jobs, I was responsible for drawing up
the deed plans for the sale of Council houses, and we would usually
start from where the centre of the party wall met the external wall.


Thanks Hugo, and thanks to everyone who replied.

It's taken me a few days to contact everyone whose boundaries will be
affected. No-one has any legal documents that define ownership of,
or responsibility for the boundaries, and no boundary disputes have
arisen that anyone can remember. One of the owners is 73 and still
lives in the house he was born in 1936! Basically, anyone who erects
a fence takes responsibility for it, and some of the neighbours have
shared the costs of a new fence and responsibility for it thereafter.

There was some interest in the proposed development because it
includes a vehicle access which will enable people to build garages
instead of relying on on-street parking. No-one raised any objections
at this stage, so my duty is to keep them happy as work proceeds.

Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 30 May 2010 12:01:27 +0100, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost
wrote:
Occasionally the written description of the Registry mentions the
boundary, but not very often.

If this is a terrace, the boundary usually is a continuation of the
party wall. In one of my former jobs, I was responsible for drawing up
the deed plans for the sale of Council houses, and we would usually
start from where the centre of the party wall met the external wall.


Thanks Hugo, and thanks to everyone who replied.

It's taken me a few days to contact everyone whose boundaries will be
affected. No-one has any legal documents that define ownership of,
or responsibility for the boundaries, and no boundary disputes have
arisen that anyone can remember. One of the owners is 73 and still
lives in the house he was born in 1936! Basically, anyone who erects
a fence takes responsibility for it, and some of the neighbours have
shared the costs of a new fence and responsibility for it thereafter.

There was some interest in the proposed development because it
includes a vehicle access which will enable people to build garages
instead of relying on on-street parking. No-one raised any objections
at this stage, so my duty is to keep them happy as work proceeds.

In general, if no one objects, things become the property of those who
maintain them, de facto and to an extent, de jure.

Sometimes its simply not worth the hassle: someone I used to know had a
shared drive. His neighbour objected to him parking cars on it, and
parked his own on it instead. In the end he built a new drive and a
hedge, all on his property, and has essentially ceded the shared drive
that actually was his, to the neighbour.

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:05:07 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

On Sun, 30 May 2010 12:01:27 +0100, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost
wrote:

Occasionally the written description of the Registry mentions the
boundary, but not very often.

If this is a terrace, the boundary usually is a continuation of the
party wall. In one of my former jobs, I was responsible for drawing up
the deed plans for the sale of Council houses, and we would usually
start from where the centre of the party wall met the external wall.


Thanks Hugo, and thanks to everyone who replied.

It's taken me a few days to contact everyone whose boundaries will be
affected. No-one has any legal documents that define ownership of,
or responsibility for the boundaries, and no boundary disputes have
arisen that anyone can remember. One of the owners is 73 and still
lives in the house he was born in 1936! Basically, anyone who erects
a fence takes responsibility for it, and some of the neighbours have
shared the costs of a new fence and responsibility for it thereafter.

The title deeds for my house (built around 1970) state that boundary
fences/hedges are joint responsibility, which does seem to be the
fairest solution.

--
Frank Erskine

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:40:50 +0100, Frank Erskine
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:05:07 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

On Sun, 30 May 2010 12:01:27 +0100, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost
wrote:

Occasionally the written description of the Registry mentions the
boundary, but not very often.

If this is a terrace, the boundary usually is a continuation of the
party wall. In one of my former jobs, I was responsible for drawing up
the deed plans for the sale of Council houses, and we would usually
start from where the centre of the party wall met the external wall.


Thanks Hugo, and thanks to everyone who replied.

It's taken me a few days to contact everyone whose boundaries will be
affected. No-one has any legal documents that define ownership of,
or responsibility for the boundaries, and no boundary disputes have
arisen that anyone can remember. One of the owners is 73 and still
lives in the house he was born in 1936! Basically, anyone who erects
a fence takes responsibility for it, and some of the neighbours have
shared the costs of a new fence and responsibility for it thereafter.

The title deeds for my house (built around 1970) state that boundary
fences/hedges are joint responsibility, which does seem to be the
fairest solution.


Indeed, it has to be the best way. But my experience has mostly been
with properties dating from between the wars, and responsibility for
boundaries has usually been stated.