law regarding garden alteration

[judethepude]

About 8 or 9 years ago, a neighbour raised his garden (adjoining ours) without consulting us. Originally, we had just a lovely dry stone wall between our gardens. Then he raised his garden by about 6 feet, and sent builders round to our side to erect breeze blocks!! We knew nothing about the new 'wall' until it was almost complete. I complained, but he simply had the builders erect ugly supports for his wall, again on our side! The structure is now an ugly mess and has ruined my garden. Unfortunately, I was ill at the time and didn't take legal action. The neighbour moved house shortly afterwards, and we have new neighbours, but I want to have the situation improved and I don't see why I should pay. Can anyone with a knowledge of the law help??

[ianess]

After 8 or 9 years accepting the situation my "guess" would be that you will be deemed to have surrendered what land was once yours.
For proper professional advice you should make an appointment with a solicitor.
Users of this site are spread world-wide so what applies in one country [even in UK] may not be true elsewhere.

[mullein3]

could you paint these breeze blocks and drill a trellis to them and grow vines or something similar up the wall to cover it totally in greenery? it sounds awfull and you may have left it to late as like you say you have new occupants..so perhaps hiding it is the only thing you can do..

[stanleyman]

Complain to your planning enforcement department.

[Hgrove]

I believe the limitation period for a claim in nuisance (tort) is 6 years from when you knew or should have known; if you are disabled the rules are different (but I don't know them). I don't think you have lost the property of your land though; that woud have been a claim in adverse possession (squatter's rights) but I think that used to be 12 years. It would have been much easier to do something about it before your neighbour sold on though. Your new neighbour is I woud imagine, totally innocent and will probably not be pleased to be asked for money. I suggest you see a CAB and ask how to get hold of your local Law Centre, or perhaps you can get legal advice under your household policy if it allows for it.

[stanleyman]

If someone has built something on your land then that is a trespass and you are entitled to remove it and bill them for the costs if they refuse to remove it themselves.

Your old neighbour is still liable if you can find him. Your new neighbour cannot stop you from removing anything from your property even if his garden collapses but you need to act very soon otherwise a claim on your property can be made after ten years.

Your neighbour probably needs planning consent to raise the level by this amount and enforcement action can be made if planning consent is refused but after ten years no action can be taken.

[Hgrove]

Taking steps to remove the nuisance yourself would be called an "abatement". IMHO you are entering dodgy ground if you attempt to do this because your current neighbour bought the property as he saw it; you both have rights now, in his case because he was an innocent purchaser who gave good value for his property without an inkling you had a prior claim. Anyway the info. I have on abatement is as follows: Abatement, i.e. removal of the nuisance by the victim, is not encouraged by the law. Normally, notice has to be given to the wrongdoer before exercising the right of abatement unless (a) it is an emergency, or (b) the nuisance can be removed without entering the wrongdoer's land, or (c) the person who created the nuisance still occupies the premises. Abatement is appropriate only in clear and simple cases of nuisance, such as an overhanging branch or an encroaching root, which would not justify the expense of legal proceedings, and urgent cases which require an immediate remedy. A person who abates a nuisance forgoes his right of action in respect of the nuisance, although he may be entitled to damages for the harm suffered before the abatement and for the cost incurred in carrying out the abatement provided the expenditure was justifiably and reasonably incurred to remove a potential source of danger to the plaintiff�s property or persons on the property. (etc.etc). In exercising the right unnecessary damage must not be caused, except that where the alternative method of abatement would damage an innocent person the interference must be with the property of the wrongdoer. This is from: Michael A. Jones, Textbook on Torts, 6th ed., 1998, Blackstone Press Ltd. You can see you are up against a problem, your current neighbour is not the wrongdoer; that was your previous neighbour.

[judethepude]

Thank you all for your replies - very helpful and people have gone to such trouble to find information for me. I rang the planning department of the local council this morning, and, although they were sympathetic, and had records of other claims against this man, they told me that, after 4 years have passed, they can take no action. I will just have to make the most of the situation, and try to disguise it as best I can.