Tweet
I have been looking into purchasing a piece of land at the rear of my property to extend my garden.
The land is privately owned but Highways are responsible for the surface and we therefore need to go through a “Stopping Up” to release the land from Highways. Stopping up is quite involved and a magistrate has to decide if the land is “unnecessary”.
I spoke with the council’s legal department who informed of the process and that I would have to pay.
I made an agreement with the land owner to purchase and costs. Before starting the Stopping up I did some leg work and made sure that no utilities were on the land that may cause issue and I spoke to the neighbours who agreed it should be purchased as it was currently an eye sore and would be better for the local environment.
I therefore started the Stopping Up with the council’s legal department.* First on the agenda was to ask Highways if the land was unnecessary and they agreed it was. However a lamppost was situated on the land, which would come inside the new boundary by a meter, and I was told to make arrangements with the lamppost owner to ensure access and light levels were maintained on a path which runs alongside. I was told SSE were the owners and options for discussion were; changing the proposed boundary, style of fencing, extension of the lighting head or relocation of the lamppost. I would have to pay for the relocation it needed. It turns out that the council still owned that lamppost and the only position they would consider was that lamppost must be moved. I therefore asked the neighbours if this was OK and all seemed good. A few weeks later I received a letter from the house at the back of property (The path runs between us) saying that the current light levels had been an issue for them since being changed to an LED and did not agree it could be moved nearer to their property. I contacted the council about this and they proposed a new light head that produces directional light downwards, can be dimmed and shuttered to avoid light spillage. Again I would have to pay for this.
I informed the neighbour of the solution but did not receive a response. The council also provided details to him. Several emails and attempts to speak directly and still no response. Both the council and I offered to meet and discuss it. No response. I resorted to hand delivering a letter which explained that we understood the concerns and detailed the solution proposed asking if he could confirm within 21 days. This promoted a response saying that he now objected to the lamppost relocation and the purchase of the land. He still did not acknowledge the proposed solution.
As Highways and I felt the objections were unreasonable, we went to the council’s legal dept asking if we could move forward with the Stopping Up. The said that whilst they were the only ones who could do a Stopping Up, they were not obliged to do so. As an objection had been raised they felt that a magistrate might find it hard to deem if the land was unnecessary and might rule against it. Therefore they would not proceed with the stopping up. This was odd for me to hear as when I started the process they said it was common to move forward with objections and these would be presented to the magistrate and ruled upon. i.e. There is always a chance they might rule against and regardless of the outcome the costs would still be paid by me.
I have written to the council’s Legal saying we believe we have a solution to the lamppost relocation. The other objection was that my boundary would be closer to his and if someone else took over in the future there may be a chance of having nuisance neighbours. I do not believe this is a material loss to the neighbour as anyone can move into any of the houses at any point, past, present and future and cause a nuisance. The purchase of the land would make no difference to this situation with the distances concerned. Yes my boundary would be closer to his but it would be the same as everyone else’s garden with the path between us just like the rest of the houses. In fact I would suggest that he has a material gain as the land in its current state is an eyesore and has been an issue reflecting badly on houses purchases.
I am still waiting for a response from the Legal Dept.
All of this has been going on since the beginning of summer 2019 and I now just don’t know what to do. If there is anyone who has been in a similar situation or has advice please let me know.
P
*
The land is privately owned but Highways are responsible for the surface and we therefore need to go through a “Stopping Up” to release the land from Highways. Stopping up is quite involved and a magistrate has to decide if the land is “unnecessary”.
I spoke with the council’s legal department who informed of the process and that I would have to pay.
I made an agreement with the land owner to purchase and costs. Before starting the Stopping up I did some leg work and made sure that no utilities were on the land that may cause issue and I spoke to the neighbours who agreed it should be purchased as it was currently an eye sore and would be better for the local environment.
I therefore started the Stopping Up with the council’s legal department.* First on the agenda was to ask Highways if the land was unnecessary and they agreed it was. However a lamppost was situated on the land, which would come inside the new boundary by a meter, and I was told to make arrangements with the lamppost owner to ensure access and light levels were maintained on a path which runs alongside. I was told SSE were the owners and options for discussion were; changing the proposed boundary, style of fencing, extension of the lighting head or relocation of the lamppost. I would have to pay for the relocation it needed. It turns out that the council still owned that lamppost and the only position they would consider was that lamppost must be moved. I therefore asked the neighbours if this was OK and all seemed good. A few weeks later I received a letter from the house at the back of property (The path runs between us) saying that the current light levels had been an issue for them since being changed to an LED and did not agree it could be moved nearer to their property. I contacted the council about this and they proposed a new light head that produces directional light downwards, can be dimmed and shuttered to avoid light spillage. Again I would have to pay for this.
I informed the neighbour of the solution but did not receive a response. The council also provided details to him. Several emails and attempts to speak directly and still no response. Both the council and I offered to meet and discuss it. No response. I resorted to hand delivering a letter which explained that we understood the concerns and detailed the solution proposed asking if he could confirm within 21 days. This promoted a response saying that he now objected to the lamppost relocation and the purchase of the land. He still did not acknowledge the proposed solution.
As Highways and I felt the objections were unreasonable, we went to the council’s legal dept asking if we could move forward with the Stopping Up. The said that whilst they were the only ones who could do a Stopping Up, they were not obliged to do so. As an objection had been raised they felt that a magistrate might find it hard to deem if the land was unnecessary and might rule against it. Therefore they would not proceed with the stopping up. This was odd for me to hear as when I started the process they said it was common to move forward with objections and these would be presented to the magistrate and ruled upon. i.e. There is always a chance they might rule against and regardless of the outcome the costs would still be paid by me.
I have written to the council’s Legal saying we believe we have a solution to the lamppost relocation. The other objection was that my boundary would be closer to his and if someone else took over in the future there may be a chance of having nuisance neighbours. I do not believe this is a material loss to the neighbour as anyone can move into any of the houses at any point, past, present and future and cause a nuisance. The purchase of the land would make no difference to this situation with the distances concerned. Yes my boundary would be closer to his but it would be the same as everyone else’s garden with the path between us just like the rest of the houses. In fact I would suggest that he has a material gain as the land in its current state is an eyesore and has been an issue reflecting badly on houses purchases.
I am still waiting for a response from the Legal Dept.
All of this has been going on since the beginning of summer 2019 and I now just don’t know what to do. If there is anyone who has been in a similar situation or has advice please let me know.
P
*
