Neighbour attempting to intensify right of way

"Only within specified hours" quote

- Says who? The landowner is entitled to use the right of way whenever he chooses unless the right is restricted and the O.P. has not given any indication that this is a restricted (legally not physically) RoW.



"without damaging the neighbours property. If the neighbours boundary wall needs to be demolished to allow a truck then this is illegal without the original posters permission. If the development is large then a ,lot of earth might have to be moved and also materials brought in. If dumper trucks are too big for a right of way less than the width of a car then he cant use them. Maybe this right of way is a footpath and not a road ? Just think how narrow a car really is and according to the original poster this right of way is narrower." quote

Of course it would be illegal to damage the neighbours property. No-one is suggesting he is entitled to. However most of your reply is speculation. You do not know the width of the RoW. You do not know whether a lot of earth will be moved or dumper trucks used. The current physical right of way is narrow due to the overgrown hedges however this does not in itself narrow the legal right of way which is why i asked if there were boundary walls along the RoW. Often in these cases the RoW becomes overgrown through non-usage however the neighbour would be entitled to cut these back provided he doesn't interfere with the neighbouring properties.


"A general right of way doesnt mean he can build a high density development without planning" quote
??? Nobody suggested that it did. His actual plans for the property are speculation and would of course be subject to all the usual planning laws.

eh ? Please edit the HTML tags on your post a little bit as I find it a little difficult to read.



*edit* this was done. thank you . my response is below.

The whole objective of my response was to motivate and encourage the original poster to help him/herself and the conclusion after exploring some avenues is theres a lot he/she can do about this within the law to make the landowners life difficult. Considering the landower wont even discuss this with his neighbour I would encourage the original poster to do everything possible and quickly without delay.

"Only within specified hours" quote

- Says who? The landowner is entitled to use the right of way whenever he chooses unless the right is restricted and the O.P. has not given any indication that this is a restricted (legally not physically) RoW.

Click to expand...

Building control applies and would tell you. I have dealt with building control personally in the past. The landowner cant start building and get out the jackhammer at 2 am in a residential area. The same applies to truck deliveries. This was my point. You'll find property rights exist in tandem with responsibilities.
Building control, the department of the environment and noise pollution all factor into this.

Of course it would be illegal to damage the neighbours property. No-one is suggesting he is entitled to. However most of your reply is speculation. You do not know the width of the RoW.

Click to expand...

Isnt' that what I have already said ?

This thread is not about Building Regulations it is about a RoW. While there may be regulations governing the times work can commence in residential areas the neighbour can use his right of way to access his property at any time he chooses.

You can speculate about dumper trucks moving earth and demolishing boundary walls but we are not in possession of all the facts here.
We do not know the true width of the RoW, only that it is presently overgrown.

rightofway said:

The problem is the road to her house is barely the width of a car, with the porch barely inches from the road.
.

Click to expand...

The above convinces me that the advice I gave still stands. Make life as difficult as possible for the landowner. Pursue every possible avenue and ask every expert in building control, planning, department of the environment and noise pollution for advice and assistance. Building control will provide assistance for free.
There is a small fee to object to planning permission being granted and there are good grounds to refuse a high density development.
If the neighbour does nothing then he or she will be shafted. I guarantee it.
The right of way issue is important but not to the exclusion of quality of life of the neighbour who lives there in that residential area. If the landower manages to get planning permission of any sort then the quality of life of the neighbour and safety of children playing and walking up and down that lane is paramount.

While I would also encourage the O.P. to use her right to object to any future planning applications the original post was in relation to the Right of Way and the possibility of intensifying the right of way.
The Planning Dept will not consider any legal (as opposed to planning) issues. The issue of the right of way is a legal issue.
While the OP mave have other avenues of preventing a future development via planning and environmental controls this thread asked for advice on the legal issue which related to the right of way in existence and whether the landowner could legally bring trucks and other vehicles through the road. We do not have sufficient information on the RoW without looking at the Title Deeds.

"Pursue every possible avenue and ask every expert in building control, planning, department of the environment and noise pollution for advice and assistance" Quote.

I agree with you that the OP should pursue all these avenues should the landowner seek planning in the future but as there is no planning application lodged at present and she has no idea what any proposed development would consist of, these avenues are not open to her now.
She should speak with her solicitor who can advise her of any legal rights she may have in relation to the RoW.

sheena1 said:

the original post was in relation to the Right of Way and the possibility of intensifying the right of way.
The Planning Dept will not consider any legal (as opposed to planning) issues. The issue of the right of way is a legal issue.
.

Click to expand...

The thread title pales into insignificance compared to the best interests of the neighbour. The type of planning permission granted will have some relation to the type of access road and right of way to the landowners site. This is why its important for the neighbour to flex his muscles in every way regarding the type and times of vehicles and activities allowed through building control and the department of the environment etc.
Endgame for the landowner will be planning permission and a development.
If planning is obtained for a new development as things stand then the new planning itself will intensify the right of way which is why its important for the neighbour to do everything possible to oppose planning.

sheena1 said:

there is no planning application lodged at present

Click to expand...

How do you know this ? This is speculation. The neighbour needs to play hardball to protect his interests , get active and check with the council about whether planning has been applied for. If the right of way is changed in any way apart from pruning back of bushes then this needs planning too.
Its possible the planning notice might be in the newspaper 'as gaelige' and with no notice on the site. Once planning is applied for theres only a tiny time frame within which you can object. Nobody is going to send the neighbour a letter asking if he doesnt mind about planning permission. The responsibility is legally on the neighbour to protect his own interests.
Action is imperative as this is the direction the landowner is obviously heading in..

There is a legal obligation to post a site notice. Failure to place this notice invalidates the application.

sheena1 said:

There is a legal obligation to post a site notice. Failure to place this notice invalidates the application.

Click to expand...

Sometimes they get away with not having it. Or depending on the strange situation regarding rights of way it could be placed where the neighbour cant see it.
Even at that once its up theres not a lot of time left to formulate and lodge an objection. and the need for vigilance is the most important point!

sign said:

Sometimes they get away with not having it. Or depending on the strange situation regarding rights of way it could be placed where the neighbour cant see it.
.

Click to expand...

This is speculation. It is a requirement of the planning laws to have a visible site notice.
There is not a lot the OP can do in terms of lodging an objection until the landowner first lodges an application with the local authority.
Sign I think we have hijacked this thread! I don't think I can add anything further as IMO the OP needs to seek legal advice in relation to her original post about the RoW and whether she can restrict the landowners use over same.

The laws of this land are not always enforced adequately.



Yeah lets stop hijacking the thread. Neighbour please be vigilant about every action of the landowner because if you dont then you will have to live with the consequences during building and also afterwards with new neighbours.

And dont let anyone discourage you from protecting your own interests. I get the feeling you are afraid of the high court and legal proceeedings and their costs in general but it will only become expensive if you decide to do anything once its too late.

Act fast and first and you will minimise the costs.

As a matter of interest, how long does the site notice have to be left up for? I know there is a five week time frame for lodging objections, but I do know of cases where the site notice has been taken down ( where houses already built are up for sale) and I presume the builder doesn't want prospective buyers to know there are other houses in the pipeline.

Thanks for all your advice. Turns out our solicitor is a donkey who has given us bad advice from the onset, hence why it has gone so far so quickly and we're now facing a High Court plenary summons. Apparently no document is in existence which states what type of right of way there is on this particular road - therefore he has a full right of way. And as vehicles become more modern, the right of way intensifies with it. The donkey said he has no document, we have no document and he has no clue where to start looking for one. Trucks have now been in and out the road and have damaged the sides of the road, pushed in shores etc. It took one truck about 12mins to get the last 50yards as the road is so narrow and it went well over the side of the road into the ditches. But according to the donkey's boss, there has been a recent case in which it was ruled that if the trucks goes over the edge of the road, so be it. Also, the right of way is not restricted by height and therefore he could force us to the top the trees along the lane. We've trimmed them so there isn't so much of a canopy and they don't touch the top of the trucks so hopefully that will be enough. I've been told he can't do anything about the actual hedge and would have to offer to buy it (which we would refuse) if he wants to take it out to give the road more width. Is this correct? Because if that's the case there's simply no point in him asking to top the trees because the base of them would still be adjacent to the road.
Now our only way of sorting this out is to argue our house could be damaged by the trucks. I took pictures of the trucks arriving (which unfortunately turned out a bit fuzzy) and we're going to get a few engineers reports done. We're going to try to show the road physically can't carry the weight of truckloads of stones, as well as showing our house has been/could be structurally damaged by the trucks. Really our only recourse is to show the house is too close to the road and therefore the size of vehicle must be limited to protect the structure.
About future planning permission....well, we would absolutely object. I've been checking regularly and nothing has been lodged. Yes you have to put up a notice in a public place but you only have five weeks from the application was lodged to object. But it could take the planners a few weeks to get round to looking at it, another few weeks before you check see if anything was happening....and suddenly the date has passed. The donkey consulted a senior barrister and he said while the right of way can be intensified, the use of the property cannot. Therefore, if he decides to throw up 50 holiday homes, we have serious grounds for objecting. Plus he'd never get the trucks by our home.....
On another note, I would not wish this mess on anyone. I've been trying to tell my mother from the start to seek a second opinion and although she did, he told her the same as the other donkey. Hence why it's gone so far. My only regret is that I didn't take it upon my self to get another third, fourth, fifth opinion.

"My only regret is that I didn't take it upon my self to get another third, fourth, fifth opinion."

Well why not do so now? It's not too late - proceedings have only just been served. The courts close down in August, and there is every chance that it will be September at least before the substance of this case gets before a court in any shape.

No disrespect to you (or your mother) but I am sure that her present solicitor will not feel at all unhappy at losing this file to a solicitor in whom you have more confidence. Get the best legal advice you can afford, but above all, get a solicitor in whom you can place your trust.

This should not in any way be taken as agreeing with your assessment of the present solicitor: the information given would not be adequate to allow me to draw any conclusion on the quality of the service already given. But the point is, you have already reached a conclusion: you don't trust the solicitor's competence. Presumably, your mother now shares this distrust. No solicitor wants a client who does not trust the solicitor's competence. It is in your mother's interest and in the interests of the solicitor that this relationship be terminated asap and in as civil a way as possible.

rightofway said:

Thanks for all your advice. Turns out our solicitor is a donkey . The donkey consulted a senior barrister ...

I've been trying to tell my mother from the start to seek a second opinion and although she did, he told her the same as the other donkey.

My only regret is that I didn't take it upon my self to get another third, fourth, fifth opinion.

Click to expand...

So I take it that the second solictor is also a donkey? Hmmmm they will let absolutely everyone and anyone into the Law Society these days..! Well they do say that the Law can sometimes be an ASS..Hee Haw Hee Haw.