PROPERTY DISPUTES 

Regrettably, not everyone enjoys good neighbourly relations and disputes with neighbours can often lead to not only animosity between the parties, but actual legal proceedings being instigated.

Very often disputes do not relate to matters of legal title, but rather one party’s use of their property and its impact upon neighbours. Such matters can, perhaps, generally be defined as in the area of “nuisance” and include things such as noise and failure to remove rubbish. However, claims of nuisance can also include flooding from a neighbour’s property or, indeed, vermin problems due to a build up of rubbish on an adjoining site.

When confronted with problems of this nature, in the first instance it would always be hoped that simply contacting a neighbour to draw to their attention the problem that has arisen would be sufficient to lead to that party dealing with matters. If, however, the neighbour fails to deal with a problem, it may well be the case that a complaint can be made to the appropriate authorities, for example the local council, in relation to a noise pollution problem. Ultimately, however, legal proceedings can be brought with the courts requested to resolve disputes, for example issuing an injunction to prevent continued behaviour deemed to constitute a nuisance.
Disputes can, however, also often relate to matters of legal title, for example rights of way over land or, more often, questions of responsibility for maintenance and indeed ownership of boundaries.

With regard to arguments relating to matters such as rights of way, often disputes arise where title deeds to a property may not make any reference to a right. However, it can be claimed that such rights have effectively been created by long user. This can be an extremely complicated area of the law, however, for example if a person had allowed their neighbour to use a “shortcut” over the rear of his garden for an extended period, say twenty years, had always been in residence of the property and hence perfectly aware of the neighbour’s use of the shortcut, had never objected to the same and indeed never sought payment for use of the shortcut, then the neighbour would have good claim that a right of way had been created and hence could not subsequently be denied to him.

With regard to the question of boundaries, it is perhaps surprising to note that for probably the majority of properties, the legal title deeds make no reference to boundary ownership or maintenance obligations in respect of the same. For this reason, it is hardly surprising that disputes often arise in this area.

In respect of maintenance, it is, in the first instance, arguably a case where “self-help” remedies apply, in that it may be more cost effective for an individual to simply erect a new fence at their property, even though the boundary in question is, strictly speaking, the obligation of their neighbour to maintain. In addition, in many cases, from a purely aesthetic viewpoint, if someone is erecting a fence on the left hand side of their garden, they may well wish to have a uniform boundary round the entire garden and hence erect a similar fence on the right and to the rear. Certainly, for the purposes of the vast majority of residential properties, the cost of resolving the question of maintenance of a boundary wall or fence in the courts would far outweigh the actual cost of maintenance.

With regard to the positioning of boundaries and hence the extent of an individual’s property ownership, this is another common area of dispute. However, in most case, the dispute should be able to be resolved without the necessity for legal action. Most properties are now registered at HM Land Registry and a suitably qualified party, for example a surveyor, should, with reference to the filed plans attached to the respective legal titles at HM Land Registry, be able to mark out exactly on the ground the position of a boundary division between two properties. In the case of dispute, hopefully, both parties could agree to share the expense of appointing a surveyor to calculate the boundary accordingly and to be bound by the results of the same. This is, ultimately, simply as a result of the fact that if, regrettably, it was necessary for such a dispute to be taken to the courts, the court would, in all likelihood, simply end up relying upon the advice of such a suitably qualified third party.

When confronted with a problem as described above, it is always advisable to try and resolve the problem amicably with the other party, but, if necessary, formal legal advice should be sought.

This article was produced and supplied by Mr Matthew Conroy LLB

If you have you have any questions regarding the above article please feel free to contact Mr Matthew Conrroy. E-mail solicitor

Also see:
 
The sellers’ conveyancing transaction process
The buyers' conveyancing transaction process
Home information packs
Solicitor fees

Contact us or apply online for a quick sale.