Ask an UK Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Hi, welcome to Just Answer. I will help you with your question.
What would you like to know please?
Can you post it here?
Hello - are you there?
I will switch to Q&A mode as you might have problems with chat feature.
hello...how kind of you to offer me a chat session so sorry I wasn't expecting such a prompt reply and missed it !
Subject to a letter of intended action I propose to issue a summons for the removal of obstructions to land retained by the head freeholder where I am currently renting from a friend. I do not want his property to be blighted for the future and I want to bring the action as he is prone to depression and has been greatly affected by this dispute.
The circumstances are that in a row of five 2 bed houses, three of the proprietors have purchased the freehold reversions, but the drive to the garages and a triangular area behind the garages, has been retained by the head freeholder (Do you call them the root freeholder?).
The area behind the garages has been used by my neighbours as an extension to their garden but it is subject to easements per the former leases. I'm sorry for my neighbour but I really do not want my friend to suffer loss and detriment to the passage of time. It is now nearly 10 years and I feel an application must be made to stop time running towards a possible claim for adverse possession by the neighbour over this contentious area. They pretended to have bought the land in 2003 when upgrading the title of their undisputed land (of which they also do not have exclusive possession either, due to another easement - total three) since an admin error by the Land Registry showed a red line enclosing the area behind the garages as part of their freehold title.
I now have a Surveyors report stating that the neighbour is encroaching and that there is no evidence of any purchase of 'the triangle' - the area behind the garages since a separate triangle is not marked out to represent a purchase. Also that all obstructions to my access should be removed.
Furthermore the neighbour through both negligence and spite over the years has caused damage to this property and to my person so I would like to make a full and detailed claim to the County Court for relief.
I would be very grateful for some pointers and also if you would read through the draft before I send it. Would that be reasonable and possible please for you to assist me with?
I will revert to you when prepared...just trying to understand your system!
I know in an agricultural tenure the tenant HAS to take action. Since I'm the party as tenant suffering the inconvenience, given the absence of the landlord - my friend - I am motivated to address the issues of nuisance, obstruction and petty encroachment. My friend has upgraded to freehold from the leasehold as did the neighbour in 2003.
Do you refer to the head freeholder as the root freeholder please?
sorry my friend is a freeholder of his house...sited on land from which the reversionary interest had been bought by other former lease holders who also have upgraded to freehold. The original freeholder retains some of the communal land, paths, drive and maintainence areas.
Just enquiring about the original freeholders reference...original, head or root freeholder(?)...not to worry maybe ask a colleague? Are you a USA lawyer?
I agree ...misunderstanding!
My friend bought the reversionary interest from the original freeholder and now replaces him with respect to his house and garden in this terrace. The communal areas are still within the title of the former freeholder of my friends place and the small remainder continues to be controlled by the head/original/root freeholder... I just look for an appropriate reference to someone in that postion...maybe the "residual freeholder"?...ie owner of the little bits left once all leasehold titles are upgraded to freehold.
thanks for that Max, at least we're now agreed over terminology before I pursue my enquiry with you. I'm sorry I don't have it ready to present but I will revert to you asap when I do.
The purpose of this application is to stop time running against me with respect to my entitlement, equal to that of the defendant, to access over land retained by the "residual" freeholder of this terrace.
I seek an order for the removal of obstructions to my access namely:
1/ A trellis
2/ A handrail
I asked earlier if you would peruse my application to the county court. This concerns a plot in the ownership of the "residual" freeholder...from which my neighbour is attempting to exclude me. They have not yet (but its close) had occupation for 10 years.
Is this wording appropriate for the claim form?
so i just give details of the order sought and then under Further and Better particulars, details of the property (and the history of the dispute?).
I don't own this plot. As I was trying to explain (and perhaps you could help me to summarise the position?) this is a small parcel retained by the residual freeholder after she sold the freehold reversions to 3 of the 5 former leaseholders. i consider it to be the maintenance area serving the garage roof for inspection and repairs, together with two paths and the drive.
The defendant has also been encroaching on my land, but I'm dealing via the help of a 3rd party user, with that. Tho I wondered about making reference to that as well. Or is it the case that it is best to keep matters simple?
For example might I have costs against me if I don't win every issue in a claim?
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).