Well, well, well ...

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 26 Dec 2009, 15:32

We were working on our new land today when a local walked up for chat.

Apparently she used to own most of the land around.

She mentioned that we own a well adjacent to the land ... but it's on the OTHER side of the fence line because in the past they didn't want their livestock to fall into it.

Soooo ... the fence line could be pushed out to recapture the well.

However it's probably not shown on any deeds ... so we might have fun getting access back!

(The neighbour DOES know of the history ... but ... err ... forgot to mention it to us)

We are still wondering how to approach this: Friendly chat? Friendly letter? Legal letter with historic evidence?

It could go well (no pun intended) ... or it could causes strife.

(At least we know there is a water source on our land, so we could dig another well or borehole if required.)

Keela · Post by **Keela** » 26 Dec 2009, 18:22

Why not just ask if they know where the correct boundary lies?

I mean is it possible that the neighbour bought the well at some point and the boundary was re-drawn? Even locals with their ear to the ground may not hear everything so perhaps tread carefully.

If the land you bought had a boundary drawn and it did not at the time of purchase include the well, then surely it is unlikely that you will get the well in the long run. After all if that strip was not sold then it still belongs to the previous owner.... or the neighbour?

Friendly - curious approach recommended. IMO you do not want to loose the good will of your neighbours by handling this carelessly.

Good Luck... and I hope the well does turn out to be yours.

phobos · Post by **phobos** » 26 Dec 2009, 20:46

might just be easier and cheaper to have your own sunk?

http://www.boreholedrillers.co.uk/well-drilling.html

rather than risk a fallout with neighbours

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 26 Dec 2009, 22:59

I would imagine there are drawings of when the land was previously purchased by the female you spoke to today. She may also recommend the manner in which to solve the issue. I would also review (in detail) the basis on which you purchased the land and the boundary drawings used. Good Luck.
PS Good thread title!

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 27 Dec 2009, 04:32

I think that land is "sold as seen" and as shown on the deeds. In law you wouldn't have a case.

stumuzz · Post by **stumuzz** » 27 Dec 2009, 11:33

It sounds like your question has nothing to do with boundaries.

S.62 LPA 1925 implies words into conveyances. The implied words include waters, water-courses, liberties, privileges, easements, rights, and advantages whatsoever, appertaining or reputed to appertain to the land. Therefore if the land had use of the well, the well use goes with the land.

There is a similar common law rule. If the lady says she was the owner of the whole land and used the well then Wheeldon v Burrows may apply. Which again may result in you having the use of the well as an easement.

These rules can be, and often are, excluded.

Make sure you get all the info you can from this lady, it may be very beneficial.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 28 Dec 2009, 16:19

snow hope wrote:PS Good thread title!

I thought it was well boring...

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 28 Dec 2009, 17:37

kenneal wrote:I think that land is "sold as seen" and as shown on the deeds. In law you wouldn't have a case.

It's quite possible that the fence isn't in the same place as the boundary on the deeds.

I had a similar situation where the neighbours ( Woodland Trust ) and the auctioneers assumed that a well used path was the boundary, but when I checked the grid reference on the deeds the path was actually 25yds inside the boundary for a few hundred yards. A quick search in the bushes revealed two stone bollards marking the original boundary. I wasn't all that fussed but I asked Woodland Trust to show me a disclaimer as they were sending people down this path as part of one of their circular walks, I also offered to swap this section, about 1.5 acres, with some land in a different place away from the walk.

They replied that it wasn't their policy to ever dispose of land so the swap was out ( ? ), within a couple of weeks they had moved their circular route and put up a fence along the boundary.

There was no argument at all, despite the fact that they had been using this strip of land as their own for many years. I couldn't ask for better neighbours really.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 28 Dec 2009, 18:11

If you bring up any queries at the time of the sale it's a different ball game. Also if the neighbours agree the change there's no problem. Once you have accepted a boundary for a period of time there are problems.

mallow · Post by **mallow** » 03 Jan 2010, 20:37

I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself wondering about how to solve the problem. People have ideas all the time about land ownership and rights and all of that in the countryside and to be honest you'd be amazed how wrong they can get it, even when it's their own land! Most of the time it doesn't matter of course but it causes havoc when people fall out. You need to establish what your legal position is first and the only way to do that is to talk to your solicitor and if necessary get a mapper out to compare the boundaries shown in your deeds to those marked on the ground and go on from there. Once you know how legally clearcut or otherwise your position is then you'll be able to figure out if or how to approach the neighbours about it.

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 03 Jan 2010, 22:08

mallow wrote:I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself wondering about how to solve the problem. People have ideas all the time about land ownership and rights and all of that in the countryside and to be honest you'd be amazed how wrong they can get it, even when it's their own land! Most of the time it doesn't matter of course but it causes havoc when people fall out. You need to establish what your legal position is first and the only way to do that is to talk to your solicitor and if necessary get a mapper out to compare the boundaries shown in your deeds to those marked on the ground and go on from there. Once you know how legally clearcut or otherwise your position is then you'll be able to figure out if or how to approach the neighbours about it.

I found a discrepancy quite easily with a compass and a protractor which led me to some bollards hidden in bushes.

I'm no lawyer, so consider this as speculation, but my understanding is that you can legally claim title to land if you have exclusively maintained it unchallenged for 12 years. Now, if you were potentially the new owner and you heard through a friendly chat that a neighbour suspected that he owned some land that you had been using for a long time then you might be tempted to put in a claim that pre-dates his claim.

If it was me, and it has been, I'd look at the deeds very carefully and take some measurements. If you have a claim then communicate with the other party with a witness. You might decide to let them use the land but you will retain title to it.

mallow · Post by **mallow** » 04 Jan 2010, 20:15

'my understanding is that you can legally claim title to land if you have exclusively maintained it unchallenged for 12 years.'
I'm a solicitor in Ireland, but our land law isn't too different from yours I think. Unless you have some tidy statutory law that we don't, then the law around adverse possession is messier than that I'm afraid. I've seen a couple of these kind of cases end up in court and it's fairly arcane stuff with lots of funny case law so, although your summary might be a useful rule of thumb, I personally wouldn't use a rule of thumb in these cases if at all possible! While it can be as straightforward as that in some cases, it really does depend on the particular facts of the case. You can claim title to anything you like, but whether you're likely to succeed or not is a much more expensive question...I'd really urge the OP to resist speculation and just get legal advice but then I would say that wouldn't I!!

I'd agree that if or when you need to approach the neighbour about it you should bring a witness but to be honest any oral agreement about land should be put in writing and signed by both in front of solicitors anyway. To be of any real benefit the witness should be someone a court would see as independent and trustworthy, but then those are both hard to come by and hard to bring along to a friendly chat without making the other party nervous. Good luck!

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 04 Jan 2010, 20:57

mallow wrote:'my understanding is that you can legally claim title to land if you have exclusively maintained it unchallenged for 12 years.'

I think the Land Registry would be likely to grant a Possessory Title after 12 years, if you can't provide proof of ownership. This means that if an owner comes forward they can still claim it. I think it could take another 12 years to get full title. That's how I understand it anyway, but it's difficult to completely make sense of it.

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 05 Jan 2010, 00:16

This is a good article;

http://www.coventry.ac.uk/cu/external/c ... arWood.pdf

Perhaps a qualified member can translate it into laymans language properly, but to me the gist seems to be that a landowner has 12 years to attempt legal removal of someone who has excluded him from his land. Crucially the 12 years appears to begin when the land is first "squatted", so if the owner doesn't notice for 12 years he seems to lose legal recourse in removing the "squatter".

Which is pretty much as I understood it. I think.

There is a bit of bumpf regarding the Human Rights Act too, but it appears to have been overuled by appeal court judges.