Easement advice -

[AndyV]

Hi to all, first time poster.

i tried to upload a photo for clarity, but I don’t have permission yet it seems.

I live in an old semi detached house with a path down the side of my house separating our neighbour on the other side. Our neighbours at either side have a right of easement mentioned in the deeds for the use of shared water
the detached neighbour is courteous and locks the gate after himself after he’s gained access to his back garden through the easement at the side of our property. The deeds do state that we are the owners of the land, but the neighbours at 77 and 81 have use of it for sole purpose of water and also of maintenance. The attached neighbour will use the easement to bring bikes to their back garden, garden rubbish, friends to access etc etc etc but everytime will leave the gate unlocked. I gave both neighbours one key each and advised them to get copies incase they lost them as I would not be incurring the cost of changing the lock should they lose their keys. The gate and easement leads directly into my back garden and is the gate which stops pets escaping etc but is also the only security for the back garden.
my questions are mainly about their rights of use given that the terms set out in the deeds are no longer in effect as there are no longer outdoor W/C’s. With the exception of maintenance, I see little reason for their use. The detached neighbour has a path at the front of his house to literally access the easement between our houses and a gate at the back into his garden. He barely goes through our garden and it’s less intrusive.
the detached neighbour comes from the road, down the front garden path, through the easement, across our back garden and into their own, through a gate I built.
the detached neighbour, in my opinion, forfeit their right to use the easement by altering the route in which they would need to take to use it. Originally there was a patch directly infront of our homes leading from her property, over the boundary and into mine. She has since had a stone porch built at the front, blocking said path and this is why she now accesses through my garden path from the road, rather than the original route from her own property on the other side of the boundary.
am I correct in thinking that neighbours cannot simply change the route and start accessing different parts of your land and that if they choose to erect something which blocks their access to the original right of way then they have infect forfeit their legal right to it? apart from that of maintenance and such.
Just a back story, when I first erected a fall gate at the front of my home in the ginnel/easement she did in fact complain for a few weeks about her family needing access and the postman for parcels etc etc. The deeds state that it’s the owner or tenant of her home only who may use the easement apart from essential maintenance. She’s the kind of neighbour who texts at 9pm to turn the tv down and then doesn’t let you know she has workmen in at 7am. Total hypocrite and a pain in my backside. I don’t want to remove their rights, only have the legal backing to know I’m correct if issues arise.
thanks for any advice. FYI I’m not a ‘Karen’… they aren’t nice neighbours and it’s already quite intrusive, especially for my partner when she’s home alone, without them using it unnecessarily. Please excuse the appearance of our home too, it was a total shell and we do renovations as and when we can afford.

[des8]

Could you please type up the complete and exact text of the easement?

Without that it is difficult to comment with any certainty.

PS don't worry about the appearance of your property.
My wife and I once renovated a derelict row of 3 cottages whilst living on site in a caravan.
Got all sorts of nicknames, but never apologised for their appearance

[AndyV]

Here’s the picture of the front of the house

[AndyV]

“AND ALSO
ALL THAT
dwellinghouse erected on part of
the said plot of land and numbered 15 Toft Grove aforesaid
TOGETHER
with a right of way over the whole of the
said common footpath passage and garden path and also an
exclusive right of user of the middle one of three water
closets erected on property belonging to number 13 Tofts
Grove aforesaid and also a right of access over the foot-
paths leading thereto
AND ALSO a joint right of user of all combined sewers
drains and fall pipes necessary for the enjoyment of the
property hereinbefore described passing in through over and
along the said larger plot of land
RESERVING NEVERTHELESS
to the owner and occupier for
the time being of number 17 Tofts Grove a right of way over
the whole of the said common footpath, passage and garden
path and to the owners and occupiers for the time being of
numbers 13 and 17 rofts Grove a right of way over the said
common footpath and passage, and over any garden path belong
ing to the property comprised herein for the purpose of
access to the most north easterly and south easterly of the
said closets o
AND RESERVING ALSO
to the owners and occupiers of 13
and 17 Tofts Grove of such joint right of user of all combined
sewers and drains as are made
over or under the property
comprised in this Assent and necessary for the enjoyment of
such adjoining dwellinghouses,
such owners being responsible
for a proportionate part of the cost of maintenance and“

[AndyV]

So, it seems that our properties were formerly 13,15,17 but are now 77,79,81. In the photo they are in order left to right

[AndyV]

Also, in the photograph, it shows the home on the left (13/77) has built a porch, thus in my opinion, blocking their access via the common pathway.

the house on the right (17/81) has a step up directly infront of their house, which leads to the gate at the front of the passageway. So for all intensive purposes, number 17/81 have rightfully kept their original and withstanding access. My dispute is only with that of 13/77

[des8]

A right of way may be revoked if you can demonstrate that the purpose for the right of way no longer exists.
However those benefiting from the right of way need to agree to release the right.
You would have to enter into a Deed of Release, to formally remove the right.

They cannot alter the route.

Regarding the gate issue, they cannot be forced to lock the gate.
One solution might be to install a button operated electric gate which closes automatically.
It will be much cheaper and less stressful than a court case!

[AndyV]

Do you think that there is any way to find whether or not they have indeed changed the original route? I would argue that before they had the porch built, there will have been a path directly from their side of the boundary to ours, for them to access the right of way.

now the porch is there they have to walk onto the road, up the road and down our main garden path, which in my opinion is not a common footpath.

so as you have said they cannot alter the route, would there be a way to prove that they have actually forfeit their right of way through building the porch?

[des8]

Assuming your view about the "common footpath" is correct, your neighbours have not forfeited their right, although they have blocked their access to the right of way.
If they were to remove the porch they could continue to use that RoW.

However the easement also states " and over any garden path belonging to the property comprised herein" Note the italicised word.

Do your attached neighbours have no other means of access to their rear garden?

[AndyV]

No, their only access is through the passage. As I’ve said though, it’s not so much the existence of the right of way as it is their use of it. They bring friends down it at times, they use it just as a route whenever they like, without a specified route and whilst I completely agree it’s more logical to bring garden trimmings etc through this way, they drop it in my garden and won’t clear it up.

mutual respect works both ways in my opinion. we’re they respectful enough to ask permission to bring random people onto our land, which I read it to state as against the terms of the RoW (as only owner and occupiers may use it) then I’d be less inclined to pursue this course.

it does say that the access over any garden path for the purpose of access to the most north easterly and south easterly closets. Not simply to access their garden or home.

Just some more background on the matter, it further states that all parties mentioned are responsible for a proportionate cost of repair to all shared drains, footpaths etc and recently we had a leak in our cellar which turned out to be a dropped drain. When we asked her to share costs she immediately said she didn’t think she had to and would check her deeds. She’s a taker. Not a mutually beneficial person. Luckily yorkshire water has ownership of the drains even on the property so they repaired for free.

[des8]

Regarding who may use of the right of way, consider that it was agreed to allow the owner of the neighbouring house access to the "ty bach".
Now obviously that must have included any persons in the house and it is normal that in the case of a private right of way anyone with a legitimate purpose for visiting the property (which could be the rightful owner, his immediate family who live there, any servants or staff who work there, anyone visiting the land for social or business or duty reasons) can use the right of way.

The access is there, even if its purpose has disappeared.
As pointed out earlier if you wish to revoke the easement you need the agreement of the dominant owner i.e. your neighbour

[AndyV]

The is for your replies. Guess we’re stuck with it then unfortunately

[des8]

Sorry, but I think you are correct there.

Might be worth running it past a solicitor, just in case
A free or fixed fee single consultation to see if there is a way forward

[AndyV]

I meant to say thanks for your replies before, stupid autocorrect