Landowner Failing To Maintain Trees/Right To Light?

[RandomUsername]

Hi, a while since I was here. How reassuring to see the name Amethyst immediately upon logging in, I know I'm in the right place already. In brief:

Acting on behalf of a friend, we've been messed about for an entire year (more emails than I care to remember) by a property management company who I eventually reported to RICS.

Management company finally decided they didn't have a responsibility over this issue when the going got tough. They fed us endless bull for a year or ignored messages. RICS were extremely helpful like I had never expected, I can't speak highly enough of Chris Ellis if I'm allowed to mention him here? He acted on my complaint and informed the company that they had acted unprofessionally, however it has been agreed that the landowner is now the company we should be dealing with.

It involves trees that the landowner has failed to maintain for many years on a strip of land adjacent to my friends property, that are so overgrown he can no longer receive TV signals as he should and has been deprived of considerable light into the property. Trees and bushes were so overgrown on to public footpath that I contacted council with video footage and they forced landowner to act, they did so within 7 days. However, none of that has resolved our issue because that was low level and facing away from the property.

I believe the landowner has no intention whatsoever of dealing with the main issue unless legal proceedings are taken. I started looking at the Right To Light legislation but it's so long I thought it would be dark by the time I'd read it! Hopefully someone on here has quick answers to our problem hence this posting.

Thanks in advance.

[Amethyst]

Aww bless, hi again. Not really my area so I'll tag des8 who I think will have a better idea of steps that can be taken ( if there are any - light isn't a right and I think action could really only be taken if the trees are presenting a danger ) The council of course could act as the trees were overhanging a public footpath. It doesn't sound like they are actually overhanging onto your friends land, simply, in his opinion, are a little on the large size restricting his tv signal and causing a lot of shade. Presumably you've been in communication with the landowner regarding cutting the trees back a bit to no avail ?

[RandomUsername]

Landowner has been well informed for an entire year according to managing agents, though hard to believe anything they say as they even refused to supply the landowners details until RICS complaint was filed. I emailed landowners a month ago then again yesterday but no reply yet, so as far as I am concerned they will ignore anything sent. It's a cover up throughout. The expense will be significant as it's years of neglect and they simply don't want to pay for it to be done. The trees are not just a little on the large side. Here's the basics of Right To Light: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_light
Thanks

[des8]

1)If they are evergreen trees complaint could be made to the local authority under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003

2)carefully check the deeds of your friends property to find out if they contain a specific right to light.

3)It is also possible to establish a right to light if your friend can demonstrate he/she has had 20 years of uninterrupted enjoyment.
The Rights of Light Act 1959 states that if a Property has received daylight for the last 20 years (the minimum prescribed period), they may be entitled to continue to receive that light. This means that if there are large trees which restrict the daylight your Property receives (for example by blocking daylight reaching a window), you may be able to apply to the courts for your daylight to be restored.

Note it is a right to daylight, not sunlight, and the amount of light is approx 1 foot-candle (about 10.7 lux)
Remember that starting a legal dispute with a neighbour can have ramifications if one comes to sell later.

[RandomUsername]

Thanks Des. Looked at the photos again and none are evergreens but that's an interesting act which I will look at out of curiosity. The trees are wildly out of control and that photo was taken in January. Will check the deeds. Would he have needed to live at the property himself for 20 yrs, or would it apply to the property regardless of who owned it? It's not a neighbour issue as it's a strip of land at the side of a mews/courtyard owned by a remote company who also own the private road between the property and the trees. Would you like me to PM you a photograph? Thanks

[des8]

The right to light is an easement that attaches to the dominant land

The neighbour may only be a remote company, but any dispute with them will have to be declared if your friend comes to sell sometime later.

by all means post a picture. PM if you want, but no reason not to put it on forum (just remove any identifying details)
nothing like an illustration to brighten up things

[RandomUsername]

Sorry for delay, deeds took time to find. The following appears in them which may be relevant. Note that "excepted" may be a grammatical error for "accepted" but is how the text appears on the document. Punctuation seems to have been in short supply in 1936.

3. There is excepted and reserved unto the transferors for the benefit of their adjoining or neighbouring property the following rights
(iii) All rights of drainage eavesdropping passage light air and water and all liberties privelages and advantages now used or enjoyed (wether as easements quasi- easements or otherwise and wether or not continuous apparent or reasonably necessary) with the said property of the transferors.

Thanks

[des8]

That is not a typographical error!

What that clause means that other land has rights over your friend's land.
Commonly the original vendor of property will insert such a clause to prevent later owners of the property complaining and stopping future developments.

Any chance you can find out who the original vendor was and what his other land ("their adjoining or neighbouring property") ?

[RandomUsername]

What that clause means that other land has rights over your friend's land. Commonly the original vendor of property will insert such a clause to prevent later owners of the property complaining and stopping future developments. Any chance you can find out who the original vendor was and what his other land ("their adjoining or neighbouring property") ?

I think that is highly unlikely. The section we copied there looks like a pile of bull, is that really how people used to talk in England in 1936?
Does that in itself not state that my friend is entitled to "light?"

[des8]

In the phrase ". There is excepted and reserved unto the transferors for the benefit of their adjoining or neighbouring property the following rights"
the "transferor" is the vendor of the land and so is retaining those listed rights for the benefit of his neighbouring land.

It is not how people spoke (at least I don't recall my parents speaking like that!) but it is traditionally how legal documents were written.
I recall drafting insurance policy wordings in the 60s without the use of punctuation other than full stops.
Whether or not punctuation matters continues to be a matter of debate.

[MIKE770]

punctuations were used to elaborate points in subject matter? if I remember correctly = within subject matter ?

[RandomUsername]

Thanks for everything so far, at which point I am going to ask the question to which I'd prefer a blunt answer. Are we effectively completely wasting time trying to pursue the matter any further due to the complications and therefore just accept there is nothing we can do about it that is within relative ease?
Thanks

[des8]

No, he could apply to the court for an order that his daylight is restored by pruning of the trees under the Rights to Light Act 1959 as per post 4.if the property has enjoyed daylight for the past twenty years.
Probably worth warning the landowner that he is going to apply for the order if they don't do the work within a given time limit

[RandomUsername]

Thanks Des, that's the act I opened with but I felt the thread had veered away from that somewhat.

3)It is also possible to establish a right to light if your friend can demonstrate he/she has had 20 years of uninterrupted enjoyment. The Rights of Light Act 1959 states that if a Property has received daylight for the last 20 years (the minimum prescribed period), they may be entitled to continue to receive that light. This means that if there are large trees which restrict the daylight your Property receives (for example by blocking daylight reaching a window), you may be able to apply to the courts for your daylight to be restored.

How are we going to determine the following though in terms of measuring the light he receives?
Note it is a right to daylight, not sunlight, and the amount of light is approx 1 foot-candle (about 10.7 lux)

Remember that starting a legal dispute with a neighbour can have ramifications if one comes to sell later.
It's not a neighbour in the general format as with most, but the owner of a strip of land marked trees in the drawing, and the private road between that strip of land and my friends property. Important to note my friends house is freehold and there is no upkeep payable in terms of maintenance on the private road/trees. I think any notes on the property in regards to this if successful may actually be a positive sign. He's not going anywhere anyhow and the type of property he has, any future buyer is unlikely to be overly concerned by this matter I feel.

What is the title of the relevant order please and costs of issuing such?

Thanks

[des8]

point taken about the status of the neighbour, but I automatically advise people to consider possible after effects of neighbour disputes just in case....

If the matter reaches court your friend will need to obtain a report from a lighting consultant supporting his contention that his daylight has been interrupted by the trees and should be restored.


He would need to use form N16A Application for Injuction (general form https://www.gov.uk/government/public...n-general-form