Access

[Ukmicky]

A unregistered prescriptive easement against registered land is equitable,not legal.

There is a big difference between the two if the land owner decides to prevent your access ,so like you been told be careful.


Also even if you did have a right to claim a prescriptive easement he may have a case if you are now using it for a business purposes when historically the use was residential.

[Fred1664]

I don't think I could be classed as a business, I own the limited company so the Taxis are my personal vehicles so servicing or repairing them on my property is just personal use is it not? As for parking they are either on my garden or on public roads around the area, the same as any other households vehicles.
surely it will be just as difficult for him to prove that a prescriptive easement does not exist?
Thank you for posting, more information is always helpful.

[des8]

The taxis belong to the company, (no?) and so the use of the track by those vehicles would probably be deemed for business purposes

It would be for you to prove the existence of the easement, not for him to prove a negative.

[Fred1664]

Yes but it is my company so surely they are my cars and I'm just driving home? At least that's what the council have agreed with.
I see, I thought he'd have to prove it, thank you once again for your input.

[des8]

I think the question of whether it is business or private use of the track would come down to how often.
If excessive (and that's probably a matter of perspective!) it would not be covered by a prescriptive easement that was claimed because of residential use.
If the previous occupier of your property had used the track for accessing parking for his business purposes then if an easement has been created it would cover your use for taxi parking

[Ukmicky]

I own the limited company so the Taxis are my personal vehicles so servicing or repairing them on my property is just personal use is it not?


surely it will be just as difficult for him to prove that a prescriptive easement does not exist?
Thank you for posting, more information is always helpful.

It comes down to what directly gains the benefit .You are not servicing your private vehicles on your land you are servicing vehicles for your business on your land and gaining access via his land . So you are using the access for business purposes.

Also to claim a prescriptive easement you have to prove to the civil law standard you and your predecessors have openly and without permission used the access for 20 years plus .

if your evidence is sufficient for it to be accepted as evidence that you may be entitled to claim an easement he then and only then needs to come back and show that the evidence you have supplied either is not sufficient under the law to claim an easement or is factually incorrect and therefore no prescriptive right exists.

[Fred1664]

Yes but it is my company so surely they are my cars and I'm just driving home? At least that's what the council have agreed with.
I see, I thought he'd have to prove it, thank you once again for your input.

[Ukmicky]

Yes but it is my company so surely they are my cars and I'm just driving home? At least that's what the council have agreed with.

No it’s business and forget what the council have said about it, it mean nothing.

[Fred1664]

Hi, I now own the house, my landlord sold to us, and I have seen the historical deeds that do show I have an easement for all intents and purposes over my neighbours lane, Am I right in thinking he now cannot stop me accessing my garden via his lane at all?
I saw him this morning and he again asked me not to fix my cars or drive in at unreasonable hours with music on etc or he'd look at gating his lane. The long and short of it is I just smiled and told him I have an easement, I have seen it so he cannot stop me using his lane. His reply was not for business purposes, my taxi company runs from another address, the council have told me I can continue to fix my own cars on my property, how does he think he can prove it's business use?
I don't think he has a leg to stand on with his thought that it is business use, I also don't think he could prove it, he's tried to prove it to the council, who closed the case, who else could he go through and given I have an easement what could he/they do?

[des8]

It will depend on the EXACT wording of the easement.

[Fred1664]

Thanks Des,
"The property is sold with a full and free right of way (in common with all others entitled thereto) at all times and for all purposes over and along the road or way coloured green on the said plan annexed hereto and with a right of way on foot (in common as aforesaid) only over the pathway coloured blue thereon."
the green lane is his lane the blue foot access to the front of our house on the plan.
There is also this covenant, but I don't think it has any relevance as it is only for the purchasers on these deeds? " The purchasers hereby covenant (but only iby way of indemnity and so long as they are themselves the owners of (number and road) ) so far as the said covenant is still subsisting and capable of being enforced in respect of ( House number, street) that they will not at any time carry on comit or permit to be carried out or on committed upon ( number, street) any offensive business occupation or nuisance and that they will not use the same in any way calculated to depreciate the value of other property on the estate of C***** v*** but so that the purchasers shall be under no liability in respect of such covenant if they are not at the time of any such breach the owners of (number, street)."
Does this covenant now apply to myself and could it cause issues with right of way or this person trying to report me again?
I'm seriously thinking of trying to go for harassment against him, he has cctv on the front of his house, and it covers the lane, I know this the council said there were comprehensive evidence logs and cctv of my vehicles along with photos of my vehicles on my garden being worked on. I feel this substitutes harassment and possibly an invasion of my privacy?

[atticus]

It is a right of way. That is not a right to do more than pass to and fro along the lane.

[Fred1664]

Thank you, therefore he has no right or legal way of stopping me using the lane as much or as little as I need to, whether that is to fix my taxis or otherwise as long as I'mnot parking in the lane. Peace of mind that I can ignore his ramblings obout stopping me.