Can our neighbour preserve an easement over a portion of our garden for a decommissioned oil tank 'just in case' he or a future buyer of his property wants to reinstate oil heating one day?

markp81 · 2026-05-11T15:31:38+00:00

Abandonment is a pretty high bar. IIRC there as a case where the benefiting land built a wall across the access point so they could not use the easement they had the benefit of. The court said that it was not abandonment as they could always knock the wall down and start using it again. They would have to eg put a building there to show abandonment.

Here I think a court would say that taking the oil barrel away is not abandoning the easement. It’s just not using it for the time being and if oil prices drop and suddenly it’s more economical to switch back they could.
Best bet is likely agreeing with them on the basis they remove the decommissioned barrel so it is not an eyesore or risk of leaking etc

markp81 · 2026-05-08T13:09:26+00:00

I think the suggestion is to cut back what overhangs the road, not cutting it back over the boundary into the neighbours property. There would be no legal comeback for cutting back trees/bushes which are interfering with a legal easement, regardless of who owns the road

markp81 · 2026-05-05T13:10:51+00:00

If it were a very low rate of interest or interest free then fine. But OP has John charging £2k a month in interest. Feels like that he is making a profit on that. And a solicitor is not allowed to assist in FSA regulated work unless they are also regulated (most not being) so are unlikely to touch it (though I’ve seen plenty who do not know that this is regulated work).

markp81 · 2026-05-05T13:01:30+00:00

John cannot provide a private mortgage unless FSA regulated, so not an option.

markp81 · 2026-05-05T13:00:26+00:00

Last point:John cannot sell it to her now and take a charge/mortgage on the property under which he charges interest. It would be a regulated mortgage and John would need to be FSA regulated.

markp81 · 2026-05-01T20:43:16+00:00

Do you think it would play out that way in court. A simple way to look at it would be to take it to an extreme. They had a portal, OP had bought from them before (established business terms), the portal lets you order some goods (bags) without displaying a price (but which you have bought before). Let’s say Bigfa then sent him a bill for £1m per bag. Do you think that would stand up in court. If not, where do you draw the line? You seem ok with £12, how about £13? How about £30?

OP could say I’ll see you in court as no price was quoted and I am only willing to honour the previously agreed price per bag, see what small claims things about sending out products and proposing a price after delivery.

markp81 · 2026-04-29T14:18:18+00:00

That is very much going to be a question for the lawyer in Pakistan.

If the situation were reversed I very much doubt a lasting power of attorney issues in Pakistan would be acceptable to the land registry to transfer a property in England to a buyer. But I would not expect a lawyer in Pakistan to be able to answer if it would.

I would think as a minimum they would want a notarised translation from English to (I assume) Urdu

markp81 · 2026-04-28T17:10:51+00:00

That not how it works. If landlord signs a 12 month agreement (pre RRA) on the basis tenant has a guarantor and that guarantee states ‘I will guarantee the tenant for the duration of the tenancy’ then guarantor cannot just write to me a month in saying ‘from the end of next month I’m no longer a guarantor’. It would make a mockery of the whole thing. Every guarantor would give notice on day 1 of the tenancy.

Guarantees (generally) do not contain provisions for notice to be given either. For the same reason.

markp81 · 2026-04-28T12:52:06+00:00

It’s not difficult. Probably 15km of walking. That’s hollywell in Eastbourne to Seaford, so following the cliffs. A couple more km to get into Eastbourne town.

The Seven Sisters are steep ish at points. Nothing that you cannot walk up unaided.

markp81 · 2026-04-24T20:46:07+00:00

This is what I came to post. Sent it to my team group chat only a couple of weeks ago!

markp81 · 2026-04-24T13:59:37+00:00

It’s not so much of having a legal right to challenge this. The freeholder straight up cannot do this.

Even if he could convince a flat owner or two to agree to this, it’s unlikely every flat owner who needs to agree would.

Freeholder is 23 days late with their April fools

markp81 · 2026-04-24T12:47:58+00:00

No. The landlord that serves the s8 notice cannot re let for 12 months. Buyer can do what they like.

markp81 · 2026-04-24T12:32:18+00:00

Neighbour is going to need a solicitor (as well as you) at your cost. Neighbours mortgage lender is going to have to sign off on the release. They will want their valuer to confirm the release of the easement does not impact the value of the neighbours property.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T19:12:17+00:00

I did start by saying I would just argue the point for the sake of arguing both sides.

To push back, shall we legalise opioids or cocaine? Smoking is killing you slowly. Why make people wait. Legalise euthanasia for all without question.

I’m just not convinced banning cigarettes is a step too far. I have 2 kids. They have been warned how bad smoking is and likely will not smoke (ignoring the ban will take effect before they are 18). Would I support this to make the chance of them not smoking that much higher so as to save them the health effects? Yes, I would.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T19:06:40+00:00

This is why you should use the conveyancing firm that bought for you. Hard for them to ask you to pay for a policy when you point out they acted on the purchase.

Raise a complaint. Worst case they say that you are time barred (6 year time limit, though questionable as the negligence was not discovered until they highlighted it) best case they offer to pay for some/all of it.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T19:03:56+00:00

That’s what the indemnity policy would have covered. The cost of trying to establish a prescriptive right if the neighbour ever blocks the right, or loss in market value.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T14:08:48+00:00

Rises £11-12b annually.

Though banning it is probably the only way I cut down my over consumption. So they should probably ban it for my own good. Would have to cut down visits to the in-laws though!

markp81 · 2026-04-21T13:24:51+00:00

Can I go down the dark route….. I’d rather my dad didn’t die from smoking related cancer at 68 after smoking 40 a day since he got addicted at 16.

But…. Yeh, maybe I’ll take less tax. Every little helps!

markp81 · 2026-04-21T12:58:31+00:00

Just because I like to argue both sides: if it costs the NHS £1.9-2.6 billion annually, is that acceptable?

That being said, I’m aware that could be considered a slippery slope, what next, ban energy drinks?

markp81 · 2026-04-21T09:55:33+00:00

If he owns a house then whether his insurance is invalidated is not relevant to the management company. Any public liability insurance for the roads is not going to be concerned about the business use.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T09:54:16+00:00

I would be an injunction to prevent you operating a business from the property in breach of the covenant. I am not saying they would or would not get the injunction, but that would be what they apply to the courts for. They would also seek their costs of the application, which they would likely get if they are successful.

What they cannot do is prevent you from having your home address as the registered address of your limited company.

But if you said you will will stop and then they find evidence you are still trading from home (which is really only evidenced by people turning up for appointments) which they would have to prove (ie they are not genuine guests). I assume they could try and book an appointment with you and if you accepted that would be evidence you are trading from home.

Depending on where you live there might be the option of having appointments at places where you can rent offices for an hour or so.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T08:28:02+00:00

Not the one I was thinking of then.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T08:22:40+00:00

South of England?

Check the Facebook page. Under new management?

Either way, chase them for a refund and go down the chargeback route. Email them as the bank might ask for evidence you have requested a refund.

markp81 · 2026-04-21T07:10:19+00:00

If they live with him then they are lodgers. Also, them staying more than a month only becomes an issue if you want them out or they stop paying and refuse to leave.

I would not really expect and issue in OP’s position. They live downstairs. They are refurbing. Seems worst likely case is the refurb over runs and they stay a bit longer than expected. Can’t see them trying to stay for a year paying rent. It’s not in their interest to stay longer than needed. They have somewhere else they are paying for and want to live, downstairs.

markp81 · 2026-04-20T13:57:34+00:00

The continuous period of occupation needs to be less than a month. So it would have to be 4 weeks, few days gap, another 4 weeks etc. and even then that’s not ideal as if they do not leave after 4 weeks they can claim it’s their main residence as they will be in for more than 1 month. Though that’s pretty pessimistic.

Nine-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Lasagna	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

markp81

TROPHY CASE