How much space does a lorry need to turn?

[Flyfisher]

Yes and I believe a deadline has been set for the recording and defining of them.

. . .
There is a deadline of 2026 to modify the map on claims based only on historic evidence. Claims based on use (20 years use without force, secrecy or permission) will continue.

I don't really understand the 2026 thing. The ramblers are claiming there are 20,000 paths that will be lost if they are not registered by 2026. Fair enough - so submit the evidence for them and get them registered. I can't really understand how there can be a 'right-of-way' if that 'right' is not enshrined in some legal document somewhere. Unless we just allow anyone to wander anywhere at anytime - and, actually, that freedom would, itself, need to be enshrined in a legal document somewhere, wouldn't it?

I thought that was the purpose of the the definitive map is the definitive map, the document of record. If a right of way is 'missing' then, of course, after due process of reviewing the evidence etc, the council can add the 'missing' RoW to the definitive map. That is how the RoW would become recognised. Otherwise, it seems to me that a 'right of way' is merely hearsay.

 

[worms]

Unless we just allow anyone to wander anywhere at anytime

Since that's what we have in Scotland (previous historic rights were modernised in the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003) I have found this whole thread fascinating!

 

[JoceAndChris]

It is fascinating, for me too - though I'm filled with dread that we've just bought a useless plot ( and that's partly why it's taken a year to buy as we've been so confused over this issue)

I had thought we would postpone fencing for a couple of years as we don't have a spare 3k and other things need doing much, much more. But, surprisingly, the legal requirement is to fence within three months so we'll just have to stick it on a credit card and do it straight away.

We'll have to get a surveyor to measure out the three acres too. I really want it to include the bit of hedgerow where, sometimes, a little stream breaks out.

 

[Tom]

Joce, there is a map available showing how the land is divided up and shows 'T' marks showing who is responsible for which boundaries (as we discussed the other day). Unfortunately, it looks like you're responsible for the longest length and the left hand side, looking out from your house. The map also shows vehicular access to plot P, giving the owner of that plot a thin strip of land along where the stream is. The boundary to that thin strip, on your side, runs in direct line with the boundary the land that came with the house originally. So, if you follow that line, you'll know whether or not you own the bit where the stream is. I know to others this may sound complicated but it should make sense to you. In any event, it should be clearly marked on the Deeds. Although bear in mind, like I said the other day, a boundary line on a Land Registry map can represent up to 6' on the land (as we found out during our dispute).

By the way, what makes you think you've bought a useless plot?

 

[skier-hughes]

But, surprisingly, the legal requirement is to fence within three months so we'll just have to stick it on a credit card and do it straight away.

We'll have to get a surveyor to measure out the three acres too. I really want it to include the bit of hedgerow where, sometimes, a little stream breaks out.

It surprises me you didn't read the legal pack before purchase, and how one arth did you buy 3 acres and not know which 3 acres it was???????? Surely this was all made clear to you before hand.

Although I'm new to land buying, I found out quite quickly a general requirement is to put up a stock proof fence within a short period of time when dealing with agricultural land, otherwise check your insurance as if the guy next door puts in loads of expensive cattle and loses them because you didn't put up a good enough fence you'll be facing a big bill!!!

 

[Tom]

Although I'm new to land buying, I found out quite quickly a general requirement is to put up a stock proof fence within a short period of time when dealing with agricultural land, otherwise check your insurance as if the guy next door puts in loads of expensive cattle and loses them because you didn't put up a good enough fence you'll be facing a big bill!!!

I'm not sure if this is entirely right. The legal requirement is for the land owner to keep his/her stock in not for others to keep them out. For example, if a flock of sheep got out and ate crops in the next field, the owner of the sheep would be liable to pay for the damage to the crops. He couldn't say it was the crop owners fault because his fence wasn't good enough. Even if the fence in between was the liability of the crop owner, the owner of the sheep would be required to ensure that his sheep couldn't get through it, for example, by using electric fencing on his side.

 

[skier-hughes]

I suppose it depends on the legal contract, but down/up here, when all the land I've been involved with has been sold it has come with a clause to "erect and maintain a stock proof fence".
If this is not done then you would be held liable.

 

[worms]

The legal requirement is for the land owner to keep his/her stock in not for others to keep them out.

Jaqy, while I think you are right on this, I understand it is quite common when a farm is selling-off a field, to put a clause in the sale deed so that the new owner bears the initial cost of the new boundary fence. Which may be what Joce is referring to. Small-print might also determine the specification of the fence, ie "stock-proof"; "deer-fence"; "sheep-proof" or somesuch, but I've seen fences that are only a couple of strands and a post every 3 or 4 meters!

EDIT: Ah! Cross-posted with skier-hughes! But I think we are saying the same thing!

 

[Tom]

@ Skier.....I suspect the clause is, as I say, to keep the owners stock in, not someone else's out.

@ Worms.....Yes, the new owner of split land will, most often, be liable for putting up a new fence, to determine the boundary and keep any of his/her own stock in. Joce was only saying she has to fence within 3 months but it was Skier-Hughes who said she would be liable if expensive cattle broke through. It's the second point that's incorrect, as I understand it. It is the stock owners responsibility to make sure that their stock does not break out.

For example, if my sheep broke through the fencing between my land and the arable field next door, which is open to the road, and they wandered through the arable field onto the road and caused an accident, it would be me who was liable for any damage as I wouldn't have kept my stock in and under control. I couldn't blame my neighbour for not preventing my animals getting on the road. My neighbour has no responsibility for my stock whatsoever. They are my sole responsibility.

Likewise, my insurance wouldn't pay out either because I wouldn't have exercised proper control over my stock.

 

[JoceAndChris]

Skier Hughes, it's too boring to explain it all but the sale of the land is as clear as mud, we're vaguely aware of how the 3 acres sits within the 13 acre field - but not specifically where the dividing lines are. Like I say, it's a wild place, that the townsfolk treat as common land. The last twenty five years has seen it just cropped for hay, with no boundaries anywhere. The new landowners - who are a bunch of crooks TBH, have taken giant fields, like this one, and other 40 acre ones near the house, and divided them into three and four acre lots to be sold off separately.

Legal pack? Where? Exchange is today, completion next week.

Thanks for the input on the boundaries Jaqy. And sheep!

 

[skier-hughes]

Joce, surely a leagal pack would ahve been given to you before hand, which stipulates where teh land is, what you need to do, ie the fencing.

Jaqy, sorry, but say I bought 3 acres of your field.
You didn't want the expense of fencing it, but thought the price for the land was good.
You sell me the land with the condition that I fence it correctly and stipulate what sort of fence I should erect and whether I should maintain it.
I don't bother fencing it.

What do you do?

Your sheep escape and you say, well it's my fault I didn't fence it off?

No, you sue the new owners of the land for not complying with their legal obligations of the purchase.

In theory, they may well argue that you should have sued them earlier for not erecting the fence, but I think you may now get my drift?

Same for maintaining a stock proof fence, in 10 years the fence is falling down, what do you say, oh well I'll just have to pay to keep repairing it, no, you insist on the person who bought the land and has the legal obligation to "erect and maintain".

 

[Tom]

No, I disagree. If I allowed my sheep to graze an insecure field and they got through and caused an accident, the blame would lie entirely with me. The law stipulates that a stock owner is liable for his stock. That's why it's hugely important to have insurance.

Erecting and maintaining a boundary fence within a purchase agreement still has grey areas. Suppose the purchase agreement said to erect and maintain a "stock proof fence". So, posts and high tensile sheep-proof netting are erected. I then buy myself half a dozen shire horses who quite fancy eating the barley next door. They push the fencing down and trample the barley. Whose responsibility is that? Mine, of course, because I failed to keep my horses in. Or, do I blame the barley owner because he didn't erect bigger and stronger fencing, possibly electrified, following the purchase of my horses?

 

[Tom]

It is fascinating, for me too - though I'm filled with dread that we've just bought a useless plot....

Legal pack? Where? Exchange is today, completion next week....

So you haven't actually bought this yet? If you think it's going to be useless, don't buy it!

 

[skier-hughes]

No, I disagree. If I allowed my sheep to graze an insecure field and they got through and caused an accident, the blame would lie entirely with me. The law stipulates that a stock owner is liable for his stock. That's why it's hugely important to have insurance.

Erecting and maintaining a boundary fence within a purchase agreement still has grey areas. Suppose the purchase agreement said to erect and maintain a "stock proof fence". So, posts and high tensile sheep-proof netting are erected. I then buy myself half a dozen shire horses who quite fancy eating the barley next door. They push the fencing down and trample the barley. Whose responsibility is that? Mine, of course, because I failed to keep my horses in. Or, do I blame the barley owner because he didn't erect bigger and stronger fencing, possibly electrified, following the purchase of my horses?

A stock proof fence is a stock proof fence and should keep stock behind it, so, yes, if there was a legal contract to erect and maintain a stock proof fence that is what should be done, it's not a grey area at all, it's a legal contract, erecting a sheep proof fence is not erecting a stock proof fence.

So, when a sheep proof fence is erected, you should be dealing with the matter immediately and get a proper stock proof fence erected. As I said, you could be held liable for negligence in not ensuring the work was completed correctly, but at the end of the day it is not your responsibility. Bear in mind we are talking about the purchase of a portion of an existing field here, not buying a whole field, or a farm, or a house with land etc, just a 40 acre field being split up into 10 lots (or whatever) and if the clauses in each persons contracts are to erect and maintain a stock proof fence then that is what they all should do.


That's it from me, can't see what else I can say to make you see that a legal contract is a legal contract full stop.

 

[JoceAndChris]

Jaqy -no, I've been round and round with this, and even though we can't build on it, may not be able to incorporate it into our garden, may find that unofficial footpath suddenly becomes offical, have to measure it out ourselves - I want it.

Otherwise I may find I'm looking at a caravan storage park, or a Christmas tree farm, or a collection of horrid field shelters and ill-cared-for animals, in ten years' time. Or even a house, if Sam gets his way - which seems unlikely, but he's built housing estates in the town already. And he's just bought another 4 acres, and is thinking of buying some more. :x

Graham, there's nothing we've been sent that's any different to the basic information available on the sellers' website.

 

[Schoolmarm]

The boundaries and corners will be easy to define or find with the wonder of hand held gps.

That plot, if it is L, is just fab. It will be an huge buffer between you and the development on the hill.

It will make your house much more desirable if you need to sell.
Will be a great house for someone with equestrian interests.

You can plant trees and hedges and all sorts if you want , even if they don't let you make it into a garden.
Nobody else's access to their plots crosses your plot and it is is going to be wonderful owning it.

 

[Tom]

@ Skier-Hughes.....In that case, Joce had better put up 10' fencing in case her neighbours decide to get turkeys!! :shock:

 

[skier-hughes]

Graham, there's nothing we've been sent that's any different to the basic information available on the sellers' website.

Link?

 

[Tom]

Will be a great house for someone with equestrian interests.

If they don't mind people with dogs walking through their horses.

You can plant trees and hedges and all sorts if you want , even if they don't let you make it into a garden.

If other owners get a change of use to build houses, Joce would have a strong case for a change of to garden, I would have thought.

 

[Tom]

Graham, there's nothing we've been sent that's any different to the basic information available on the sellers' website.

Link?

It shows the precise location of Joce's house, which is why I didn't post it.