Fence Damage

PCeeeee

Some hypothetical horses are in a field. Said field is adjacent to a private dwelling. There is a post and rail fence, in poor shape it must be said, around the house.

There is also a sheep wire and top strand of barbed wire outside of the post and rail erected at some stage by people farming the land. Our hypothetical horses are reaching their heads in over the barbed wire and have eaten a tree. They are also eating the post and rail fence. The consumption of the fence is also causing movement in the fence doing it no good either.

Is this an issue for the hypothetical horse owners?

Mad_maxx

PCeeeee wrote: »

Some hypothetical horses are in a field. Said field is adjacent to a private dwelling. There is a post and rail fence, in poor shape it must be said, around the house.

There is also a sheep wire and top strand of barbed wire outside of the post and rail erected at some stage by people farming the land. Our hypothetical horses are reaching their heads in over the barbed wire and have eaten a tree. They are also eating the post and rail fence. The consumption of the fence is also causing movement in the fence doing it no good either.

Is this an issue for the hypothetical horse owners?

of course it is , its the horse owners responsibility to keep them from infringing upon the private dwelling , if the horse owner planted a tree on his or her property and the owners of the dwelling either allowed a dog , pony or even their kids to damage it , then the onus of responsibility would lie with them

runawaybishop

Mad_maxx wrote: »

of course it is , its the horse owners responsibility to keep them from infringing upon the private dwelling , if the horse owner planted a tree on his or her property and the owners of the dwelling either allowed a dog , pony or even their kids to damage it , then the onus of responsibility would lie with them

Not necessarily, it depends who is liable for the fence

PCeeeee

runawaybishop wrote: »

Not necessarily, it depends who is liable for the fence

What does liable in this sense mean?

Mad_maxx

runawaybishop wrote: »

Not necessarily, it depends who is liable for the fence

the tree belongs to the people in the dwelling regardless of who owns the fence , unless those who own the dwelling have a creature causing damage on the outside , the condition of the fence is irrelevant , right now , creatures on the outside are causing damage inside the dwelling property

runawaybishop

PCeeeee wrote: »

What does liable in this sense mean?

Whoever has the responsibility to maintain the fence. Often times when land is sold the plot comes with a clause stating they must maintain the fence.

runawaybishop

Mad_maxx wrote: »

the tree belongs to the people in the dwelling regardless of who owns the fence , unless those who own the dwelling have a creature causing damage on the outside , the condition of the fence is irrelevant , right now , creatures on the outside are causing damage inside the dwelling property

It's not irrelevant if the property owner is responsible for keeping the fence in good order.

PCeeeee

Thanks for the replies all. Interesting views

Mad_maxx

runawaybishop wrote: »

It's not irrelevant if the property owner is responsible for keeping the fence in good order.

In the vast majority of cases where imposters do damage, the owner of the property where the damage occurred is not responsible

If a clause in the title places responsibility on the dwelling owner to keep imposters out by maintaining the fence, that is different but it would not be the default position

Mod
Imposters?

krissovo

I had a similar issue where horses damaged my post and rail fence. I ended up liable as our title had burdens for stock proof fencing around the land which was a condition of sale for the farming zoned land. Their argument was that the fence was clearly not stock proof.

The reality was that after negotiation we split the cost of repair.

runawaybishop

Mad_maxx wrote: »

In the vast majority of cases where imposters do damage, the owner of the property where the damage occurred is not responsible

If a clause in the title places responsibility on the dwelling owner to keep imposters out by maintaining the fence, that is different but it would not be the default position

We aren't talking about the vast majority of cases here though,we have been given a specific example in the op. In the vast majority of cases strict liability lies with the stock owner, with one key defence being available - fencing that isn't their responsibility causing the problem.

It is extremely common when selling a site to include a clause about boundary maintainence, that's why it's important to clarify here who has the responsibility for looking after the fence.

Ginger83

PCeeeee wrote: »

Some hypothetical horses are in a field. Said field is adjacent to a private dwelling. There is a post and rail fence, in poor shape it must be said, around the house.

There is also a sheep wire and top strand of barbed wire outside of the post and rail erected at some stage by people farming the land. Our hypothetical horses are reaching their heads in over the barbed wire and have eaten a tree. They are also eating the post and rail fence. The consumption of the fence is also causing movement in the fence doing it no good either.

Is this an issue for the hypothetical horse owners?

Yep