Right of access

[wales01man]

Re: Right of access

Would a bailiff give a stuff we see some taking third party goods and cars despite strong evidence

[enquirer]

Re: Right of access

You withdraw the implied licence. In effect, you simply say 'You may no longer assume that you have permission to enter onto my property'.

With access direct from the highway, it's straightforward. The OP's situation is less clear - access is from the highway, then over land owned by a third party. The OP has the right to pass over that land, but does not own it, or appear to have any exclusive rights.

On the details given, I would say that the OP could withdraw the implied right to knock on his door (that is to say, to come off the access road and onto his exclusive property), but no more. I suspect that any vehicle left on the access road would be fair game.

As to locations with no implied right of access (any recognised postal address would be held to extend same), I would have thought that simple trespass would apply from the outset.

[MissFM]

Re: Right of access

Most FMOTL material is certainly to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, withdrawing the implied right of access (WOIRA), is a reality and can be enforced.

"There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc”. Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed MR.

Please would you enlarge on this, Enquirer?

Also, what are the implications where there is NO "implied right of access" in the first place?

[enquirer]

Re: Right of access

Removal of implied right of access is something dreamt up by a group known as freeman on the land. It has no legal bearing in society. It has never worked properly and is only usually put up by people who have no intention of paying their debts and contributing to society. Using a freeman of the land tact in a court can result in the person being charged with contempt. Dont waste the ink in your printer. Stay away from such "information" websites.

Most FMOTL material is certainly to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, withdrawing the implied right of access (WOIRA), is a reality and can be enforced.

"There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc”. Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed MR.

[MissFM]

Re: Right of access

I'm quite interested by the "access" arguments.

In the olden days we used to have laws against trespass and put up signs (eg "Private property, no unauthorized access", "Trespassers Will" etc.). Nowadays it does seem impossible to challenge or prevent anyone from entering private property unless they commit overt (provable!) criminal damage. Even then, the police tend to not wish to be involved and advise extreme caution.

And don't let's even get started on the "right to roam".

So how any NORIEA (or whatever the acronym) can prevent somebody going about their lawful business as ordered by the courts is beyond me.

I have seen rather historical (pre April 14) anecdotal evidence on various websites and videos where it has been claimed that invoking this notice has occasionally delayed the inevitable (but we haven't been apprised of the final results).

In the absence of any actual proof that the customary legal system can be suborned in this way it seems irresponsible to advise people in desperate situations to do otherwise than to engage with the relevant authorities to mitigate and resolve problems.

QV the advice in the Bailiff sections on this site and the one or two other internet sites that offer free and impartial informationat no profit to themselves.

However, as said, it's a subject about which, like the OP, I would like to learn more - particularly if there are legal precedents etc..

[MattDavies]

Re: Right of access

I was referring more to pointing out to the company that they would have to access someone else's property to get to mine, not to send a NOR letter in reference to my propertty. It was more a question as to whether it would be legal to attempt to levy say on the vehicle that was parked on someone else's land.

[Crazy council]

Re: Right of access

Acsess rights over land will be in the deeds of all propertys that acsess it. You can get yourself in serious trouble blocking an acsess route.. think ambulance or fire. If its a seriuos question about legal rights of acsess. Fire away. Will see if i can advise.. if its an fotl thing. Like the others say. Dont get dragged in. Its a fools folly. If you want advice in dealing withvwhatever situation has lead to the bailifs or there charges. Some of the otheres who post on here are great at that.....

[josephbloggs]

Re: Right of access

Removal of implied right of access is something dreamt up by a group known as freeman on the land. It has no legal bearing in society. It has never worked properly and is only usually put up by people who have no intention of paying their debts and contributing to society. Using a freeman of the land tact in a court can result in the person being charged with contempt. Dont waste the ink in your printer. Stay away from such "information" websites.

[wales01man]

Re: Right of access

You could try highly unlikely any bailff woud take any notice