Political Process - Property Rights

Prisoner6409 · 19-02-2002 9:10pm #1

Hi,
I am seeking advice from ppl who know a bit about the political process and how one works within it. A couple of years my immediate neighbour incorporated a large chunk of the public road into his own property and errected a gate across the road. We live on a very narrow road and his is the last house. The result of this is all traffic visiting his house and indeed his own 2 cars are parked outside my house blocking my drive way and generally creating a great nusience. This road falls within the remit of the roads dept. When I changelled my neighbour about his actions he told me a local councillor told him he could do this although he did not name the councillor. He did not seek or gain permission from the revelant authorities. I contacted the revelant person in the Roads dept and a local Lab councillor about this matter. They said they would look into it. However 3 years have gone by and nothing has been done. Letters and fax's I have sent to the dept looking for an update on the matter have gone unanswered and phone calls are ignored. Its hard not to think something is amiss. Even if they wanted to the local road dept cannot divest itself of public property without going through proper channels. Can someone give me any pointers as to what my next step should/could be. I know there is a legal avenue I could go down but I should not have to fork out money when someone is being paid a yearly salary to deal with these matters. I sick hearing politicians talking about transparancy and accountability as I can see none in this case. Any advice would be greatly appericated.

Victor · 19-02-2002 9:38pm

This is a procedural and not a political matter, although having a politician on your side may help. I've been involved in a number of such instances, relating to building projects.

Ownership
The land is either owned by someone or abandoned.

If owned by a private entity(s) (a person, company, charity, etc.) that person has ultimate legal say on what happens. If publicly owned (state, local authority) they have the legal that organisation has ultimate legal say on what happens.
There are a number of in between situations. If part of a road or similar 'common area', it could have been 'taken in care / charge' by the council, but remain in the ownership of the original owner. Often in rural areas and on old town / city streets, the adjacent landowners have rights as far as the centre of the road. In most modern housing estates, the council takes over all rights to roads, paths and green areas.
If abandonded, someone can try to claim it, but would need undisputed possession (depriving other of occupying it) for 12 years (Statute of Limitations 1957-1991), this is called adverse possession and has been upheld by the courts.

Statute of Limitations 1957 http://193.120.124.98/ZZA6Y1957.html

Statute of Limitations 1991 http://193.120.124.98/ZZA18Y1991.html

Leases
I am ignoring this for the moment.

Possession
This can usually be determined by who currently occupies the land (to the exclusion of others). In this case it would appear to be your neighbour.

Other Rights
Other people may have rights over the land, for example Rights of Way. This is unlikely in a cul-de-sac situation, unless he is blocking a route that you habitually used.

In summary
If he closed off council land, force the council to take legal proceedings (a nice registered letter to the legal and planning departments should work nicely). If he closed off private land, then you need to find the owner, then it is up to the owner(s) to take legal proceedings. If you are the only one affected then it may be up to you to take legal action. The Garda will not usually get involved as it is a civil matter. Having delayed 3 years will work against you.

Prisoner6409 · 19-02-2002 11:02pm

Victor many thanks for you very informative reply. My situation would fall in the category of: "He closed off council land" which is the public road and as far as my research has taken me there are also public "right of way" issues involved.

I did write to the council(Roads Dept) asking what they had done, and what they purposed to do if the other party did not comply but they ignored the letter. However I did not send it registered, which would seem to be a better idea, thanks and I had not thought of contacting their legal department.

As for forcing the council to take legal proceedings or any other action, at this point in time they would appear not to want to do anything unless 3 years is normal in these situations but even if this is so the lack of correspondence from the council is leading me to feel suspisous about the whole thing.

In the meantime I will take your advice and re-post my letter to the council(registered of course) and send a copy to their legal dept.

Thank you again.

Victor · 19-02-2002 11:07pm

Roads department may not care. They only really care (hah?) about road works. The neighbour closing off the road probably saved them (roads dept.) money.

and as far as my research has taken me there are also public "right of way" issues involved.

As I understand it, the RoW must have been used (to get to a destination, not just another bit of road) in the first place and kept current. I'm not sure, but I think they lapse after a year of non-use.

Prisoner6409 · 20-02-2002 12:43am

I can see your point about the RoW issue but surely a public road that does not necessarily go anywhere is not up for grabs to any Joe Public who wants to enlarge his own property at the expense of the local authority which is indirectly funded by other citizens . Bear in mind over the years the road(all of it) has been maintained by public money and in either case the local authority seems to be divesting itself of it's property without payment (presumably) and without adoption of the usual procedures regarding such divestiture and public right of way closure. The reason I contacted the Roads Dept was when I contacted Planning Enforcment in the beginning they informed the particular road was in the care of the Roads Dept and as such it was up to them to sort out. I do believe this is true as this situation does not come under planning regulations as to seek or obtain planning permission one must own the property one is seeking planning permission or not for. If you had any other ideas about who may have jurisdiction over this matter I would certainly persue that avenue.

Victor · 20-02-2002 1:05am

Not sure if I can give you much more advice, but i would make the following comments:

Originally posted by Prisoner6409
I can see your point about the RoW issue but surely a public road that does not necessarily go anywhere is not up for grabs to any Joe Public who wants to enlarge his own property at the expense of the local authority which is indirectly funded by other citizens

As above, if the actual land is owned by (hypothetically) the guy at the end of a cul-de-sac, then other factors aside, local authorities are inclined to hand it over, if requested. They have no selfish interest in it. The same does not apply to a complete stranger. The guy at the end of a cul-de-sac is an exception.

Originally posted by Prisoner6409
Joe Public who wants to enlarge his own property at the expense of the local authority which is indirectly funded by other citizens . Bear in mind over the years the road(all of it) has been maintained by public money

Nearly irrelevant, most local auorities would only look at this type of situation with regard to what it would cost them in future (maintenance, insurance, etc.).

Originally posted by Prisoner6409
without adoption of the usual procedures regarding such divestiture and public right of way closure.

No one is perfect, especially not local authorities (much as _some_ try)

Originally posted by Prisoner6409
The reason I contacted the Roads Dept was when I contacted Planning Enforcment in the beginning they informed the particular road was in the care of the Roads Dept and as such it was up to them to sort out.

Part of this may be buck passing. The Planning Dept. (as opposed to Planning Enforcement necessarily) _do_ have an input into "the proper planning" of the area. What type of boundary did the neighbour erect? Anything over 1 metre high (in an urban area) would normally attract planning attention.

Originally posted by Prisoner6409
I do believe this is true as this situation does not come under planning regulations as to seek or obtain planning permission one must own the property one is seeking planning permission or not for.

You don't need to own, you merely need the owner's consent (to the specific application). A small garden boundary wall would not normally need planning permission.

gandalf · 27-02-2002 5:43pm

This is probably more relevant to the Accomodation board so I'm moving it there.

Gandalf.

Political Process - Property Rights

Comments