We Had TRESPASSERS At The Old Station
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лип 2024
- Today we discovered we had trespassers at The Old Station and they had destroyed some of our garden, unfortunately these vandals may have thought what they did was legitimate! If you can help us find out who the trespassers were we would really appreciate it.
Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
00:45 What Happened?
02:27 Checking Out The Bridge
04:42 In The Garden
09:36 A Wander Around The Bridge
10:09 Not Impressed
Hi, I own an old railway property too. And luckily have the original deeds from 1897, luckily, as land registry sometimes do not have the complete information. And in those deeds it mentions that the railway company does have and will have access to my land if required for various reasons. There has been no station here since 1927 but if they so wish they can enter to cut the trees on the sliver of land left behind my property, where the station used to be. This is not mentioned on the present modern deeds. I have had them legally checked and even though the original railway company is no longer in existence, network rail holds the rights to do so. On the plus side, when the present owner of the office unit next door tried to block off the end of the private road, out come said deeds as it mentions I have right of access at all times around the original station entrance. So maybe worth seeing if you can find the historical documents. Kew in London is a good place to start at the public records office.
Carry on the good work
Wow that’s amazing, we have nothing like that with ours, thanks so much for sharing 😁
And this is why sales involving railway deeds can be a nightmare. They usually have restrictions and rights of easement in them all geared towards the railway companies benefit. I suspect that the Old Station has deeds containing them. As I've said elsewhere they need to go back to their purchase solicitor and confirm the exact legal position BEFORE they can talk to any third party who carried out the work. Once a condition appears in deeds it is there for ever regardless as to what happens to the land further down the line.
Ah, the old land ownership problem - just because you own a piece of land does not mean that you are exempt from Statutory Authorities coming onto your land to carry out work and they do not need your permission. I would have checked whether or not the bridge was yours in total or that you owned land adjacent and under the structure. Frankly I think you should be glad that the bridge is not your responsibility because the maintenance costs can be horrendous. As to the removal of the trees you have to remember that a silver birch has a wide canopy and the roots extend beyond the diameter of that canopy. Be thankful that you have no oak trees near the bridge otherwise they would have been removed.
Additionally, I would check with your local County Council to see if there are any Statutory Footpaths that have access through your land - just because no one has walked it does not mean that there is not one. In that event you would be required to maintain the footpath.
Almost certainly wouldn't be classified as trespassing if it's maintenance for the bridge. You may actually be required to keep this area cleared yourself if you move in (or be held liable for damage your plants cause the bridge).
I can empathise with your initial feelings of offence. Statutory authorities seem devoid of common courtesy. What would it have cost them to run a few checks first? If they had liased with you first how different this week's bulletin would have been. Have you checked your Deeds to see if there is an Easement on your land? Even if there is, what would have been wrong with a little bit of well-placed courtesy towards you who mean nothing but good towards the Old Station?
Somebody was making room to inspect that bridge and make sure it was safe and didn't need any work
They could have said something to the owner.
@@deineadam2240the owner doesn’t own the land there will be an unclaimed strip between the bridge and the station
Yes the council will have access to the bridge regardless of boundaries for the safety of road users
@@apb3251she said she does. Right to the bridge.
@@deineadam2240 she might say that but it’s not true or the reality. Anything that has a right to access is subject to rules that allow for maintenance. If she has an issue with it, she can attempt to purchase the bridge for the highways agency and she how far she gets. Same if you have a right of access for ramblers, a railway bridge, aqueduct or canal. It ain’t yours and if you damage it, say hello to your cell mate
I'm surprised you didn't hear them clearing....
That’s exactly what I’m asking myself. How can it be that you didn’t hear any work Iike that being done? Strange.
@@heinzinoheinzino4352 They probably used Electric Battery saws, and hedge trimmers as they are quiet compared to gas powered equipment.
@@timothyokane9710you list items that still make noises above 60db plus the felling of a tree or shrubs is not silent
I hope we're not going down the route of tacky click bait 🤮..the unsubscribe button awaits .
Only mystery is who to send the thank you card to.
or the bill
Clearly the work of municipal authorities, not vandals. 🙄
Is it possible that the road right of way extends beyond the bridge itself? Check with the local government at the county seat.
I was going to say to check with the council. It would have been done to keep the road way and bridge clear for maintenance.
Don't be an arse about it though because they may charge you for the work xD
Usually they give property owners notice when they do this kind of work.
Looks like the city did you a favor
yeah, some authorities need some heavy yelling at them...
Local authority probably. The foliage was likely too near the bridge - the tree may have been overhanging.
I don't believe the tree was overhanging, from the footage shown. Regardless, contractors only had the right to trim back any overhanging branches. Not climb the fence and trespass.
Any need to remove a tree perhaps thought to be a risk of roots undermining the bridge should have been discussed with the landowners.
@@lemonladyYTmunicipalities and rail way companies often have right of way on land adjacent to bridges and roads. If that is the case, no permission or discussion is required. Luckily, shrubbery and trees grow back.
Tree roots could cause damage to the bridge so the clearing would have been required. Have you checked on the other side of the bridge?
If you don't own the bridge, the entity that does has cleared growth away from it to protect the structure.
Trespassing in order to do so.
@@lemonladyYT not trespassing. Public works like bridges come with easement access.
@@jphanks Still have a responsibility to notify the landowner of an intention to cross the property boundary.
I agree with both here. I don’t think it’s vandles, it’s a maintenance crew. If the object was to protect the bridge then accessing the land beside it makes sense. Still they should have contacted you first. Maybe it’s a heritage entity.
I would also do some research on the tree they cut down. Maybe its root structure is larger than you think and the roots would endanger the bridge’s integrity making it necessary to go.
@@lemonladyYT Not neccessarly. It woiuld depend on the bylaws and the terms around the purchase of the land. The council or agency responsible for the bridge just can't stop everything in the world, because some people expect a phone call every time something needs doing. Clearly there is an easement in place around the bridge. All the owner needs to do is find out what the easement conditions are and remember to wave and perhaps offer the workers a cuppa next time they are on site. Its a lot of drama about nothing and thats made obvious in they didn't even know it had been done until they were out there trying to tame some of the undergrowth themselves.
Do you have a bridge authority that handles maintenance on their roads or something? This looks exactly like they do in the US to keep overgrowth from destroying the bridges, power lines, etc. We have "right of ways" here, not sure what you guys may have, but that protects the bridge authority in what they do to clear things out that are on someone's property.
I was going to say the same thing. It just looks like a county maintenance job. I do think they could've notified you they were going to come onto your property though. I think it looks good and they saved you from having to clear out!
I do agree, the roots from a tree can damage a bridge. Roots can damage plumbing lines or drainage to homes.
There might be a covenant or bylaw that the landowner must keep the area around the bridge clear or that the council have legal access to keep the area clear.
The most sensible comment so far. Property deeds need checking and a call to the Council for a polite discussion.
The highways authority is empowered by law (Sections 289 and 291 of the Highways Act 1980) to enter private land for the purposes of survey and maintaining bridges. You should now check with them to see if they have plans to infill the space under the bridge as they have been doing, quite controversially, across the country.
They also have a responsibility to notify the landowner of any intention to cross the property boundary.
@@lemonladyYT So in your world the rail services to Edinburgh for example could be suspended because the rail authorities cant find Mrs Brown, who has a bridge for the national rail network over her property and they cant raise her on the phone to let her know they are popping over to use the gate on her property to access and perform critical bridge maintenance after the recent rains. Ok.
@@WorksOnMyComputer don’t be silly. Thats not what she meant. Move along.
they did you all a massive favor.
This wasn't vandalism. This looks like a planned maintenance job. Maybe whoever did this job didn't know the property has new owners.
Regardless, the property has always had owners who should have been notified.
That would be my interpretation too -- perhaps a contractor with an over-enthusiastic idea of what needed to be done. "Never attribute to malice what might reasonably explained by incompetence," particularly when dealing with a government bureaucracy.
@@lemonladyYT There was surely miscommunication involved. I don't know for how long it was not inhabited, but it looks like it was decades. Maybe someone had his/hers whole work life only one information - it's abandoned, no one to notify.
@@flybywire5866 It was not abandoned, just not lived in. The owner's details are held on the Land Registry.
2:03 That bridge number plate is definatly an old one… would be nice to clean up, repaint and leave it in situ… have a look on the opposite side, there maybe one there too.
Don’t think vandals would do this 😮
Very NEAT vandals, if they did...
I don’t see it as vandalism. Whoever did it did you a favor. I think it looks a lot better and less work for you to do. Plus it was free.
You’re right about the side of the bridge, looks much better. Just feels a bit of a liberty to do it unannounced and to have it down a large section of our boundary bushes to get access. If they’d told us they could have come down the drive and been given a cup of tea!
@@theoldstationrenovation how did you not hear them ??
>"Whoever did it did you a favor." Right! I'd be sending a thank-you card, some flowers and a bottle or two of wine to whatever entity that did this. The implication of vandalism is preposterous and that of tresspassing is only slightly less so. To The Old Station folks: get in touch with the authority who did this and have a nce polite talk about who's responsible for what around that area. I'd recommend keeping any attitude in check, at least for the time being.
Why are you calling it vandalism 🤷♀️ you know who it probably is , why the dramatic thumbnail? Also how come you didn’t hear them ? I won’t be back
@patriciakeogh5008 really not everyone knows the terms and conditions of highway maintenance unless you are looking for it. OK the thumbnail was a bit ott. Most people who own land on properties with bridges and towpaths wouldn't think of looking at the laws of highway & Bridge maintenance.
The tree you're concerned about may have been 6 foot from the bridge but the roots are what causes the damage
You must realise by now what so many have said already - this isn't vandalism, this is carefully implemented maintenance by an authorised body. It would be sensible to seek them out and start a conversation. Great series. Thanks. Simon T
Be glad you didn’t receive a notice asking you to cut down the trees that could be seen as a risk to the bridge and road users. Tree surgery can get expensive real quick. It’s also likely that while the trees are within your property boundary they could also lie within an easement area where the authorities have jurisdiction to manage as they see fit.
The Historical Railways Estate (HRE) is a forms of over 3,100 structures-predominantly bridges, viaducts, tunnels and other works-associated with former railways in the United Kingdom. The structures are owned by the Department for Transport (DfT) and managed by National Highways (NH).
Yes, and in all probability, National Highways has access to private property much in the way that Network Rail has access to private property to maintain structures associated with the live railway. Various parliamentary acts going back to the 1840s assert Network Rail's rights
That’s the fellas. Use to be called the ‘Burdensome Estate’, which I thought was a fantastic name!😊
Haha with a click bait title you deserve a bill for the work they have done 😂😂
Nothing else to film this week?
So you are saying the vandals are an organised gang who roam all of the UK terrorising land owners. :)
Quite obviously not Vandals
Potentially cleared ready for a bridge inspection.
Looks to be exactly that. Too tidy for tree thieves.
Highway maintenance team, specifically bridge maintenance team as they have only cleared that area and haven't continued along the road.
It looks like Network Rail has been clearing up the bridge, because they are the people who maintain rail bridges throughout the country.
The only thing I’m a bit concerned is you didn’t see or hear anything.
If I were you I would give Network Rail a call just to check and see and if there is a clause in your contract about the bridge?
Keep up the good work looking forward to seeing your progress on the old station renovations.
Won't be network rail as it hasn't been a railway for decades it will be the council clearing vegetation so they can inspect or carryout work on the bridge.
This would have been very loud and taken several hours. So it is concerning no one heard it. And tree roots do all of the damage and are hidden so you don't always see how big they are
The bridge is probably still owned and maintained by the railway or highways agency and they were doing inspection/maintenance to it.
I'll have to find my question re bridge ownership from an earlier video. I believe the response was 50/50 landowners either side, which would mean Highways/Council are only responsiblefor the road surface over the bridge and the verges and any overhanging foliage. Maybe the deeds need checking.
@@lemonladyYT Council cant just maintain the roadway and ignore the infrastructure supporting it. Are you arguing the land owners must maintain the bridge to code? The bridge is clearly still in use as a public access way.
if it was the highways agency they would of cot down the foliage coming to and from the bridge
@@WorksOnMyComputer I'm not arguing anything, just recounting the response to a question I posed several months ago.
@@185LANDY Not necessarily.
This clearing was a huge job. Honestly it looks better. But, as you don't own the bridge, or the road above you may not have a say in how it's trimmed and cleared. This looks like a professional job. This is NOT vandalizing at all, it's just simple clean up and clearing. This "is" a legit job and it looks so much better. I would be grateful for the help.
I cannot understand how you can use the word "vandals". Surely common sense tells you that this was done by the council or similar body?
If you had a UA-cam channels that runs off views, you’d be banging that clickbait in also. Happens on every UA-cam clip
@@Camera-Lego-Bird-Feeder It has nothing to do with click bait lol
@@davidwoods7720 not sure you know how clickbait works. Look at the thumbnail and title. If it was just a picture of a bridge with the title “standard council foliage maintenance” that wouldn’t entice people to watch it, people love a bit of drama c’mon ! Even a “trimming bush” title would get a few more views now wouldn’t it David ?
@Camera-Lego-Bird-Feeder But a less clickbaity title would still have regulars watching out of interest. "Who cut down a tree in the bridge garden without our permission?" (Wordy, but you get the idea.)
@@lemonladyYT true, but if only your regular viewers watch you don’t grow as a channel, it’s the passing traffic scrollers you need to catch the eye of, the clickbait title and thumbnail drags people
In from suggestions on their feed
Vandals or not, it looks 100% better.
Vandals wouldn't hav done that.if it was the council it probably to make sure the bridge wont get damaged. Definitely not vandals or everyone would want wandals like that lol.looks better now to me
They did a nice job clearing the area around the bridge.
If it were here in the U.S., I would say the county roads department was clearing their right of way around the road and bridge. The bridge is part of the road, not part of the old railway line. Good luck getting your answers!😊
You have a lot of supportive followers who are genuinely interested in what you’re doing at the old station. This post has not been one of your best. You’ll get far more quality subscribers by making positive posts with positive titles rather than what appears to be very close to click bait.
We’re really, really grateful for people who are following and supporting us, I guess we were just a bit shocked that they came in without speaking to us. If they’d spoken to us we’d have given them unrestricted access down the drive so they wouldn’t have had to shred a large chunk of our boundary hedge to get in.
Thanks for the honest feedback 😊
@@theoldstationrenovationyes you must have been surprised yet in time you will understand
Not vandals if this is a public road. This is bridge maintenance. They do this here in the US. It looks really nice and less work for you.
Someone from the Council perhaps?
Agreed that is would be the local council. And depending on the council and their policy etc they may have it worded that in instances where they are required to maintain accessible roads and maintenance they have an obligation to not necessarily inform the land owners of essential works and have assured access regardless in the completion and compliance of said maintenance. So although technically trespass, they have rights of access.
They still have a legal responsibility to notify the landowner of intent to access and of the works being planned.
@@lemonladyYT not all the time especially if it's in respect of maintaining a public road. In my experience they have an invisible line of up to 10ft around the structure where they don't need to inform the landlord. Especially with smaller hand held powered tools. If they need access with a digger or tractor then it would be different
Definitely your local highway dept doing maintenance. They probably have some kind of easement for this kind of thing.
Yes
I'm with the others who have stated that it's not vandalism, rather some 'entity' such as the municipal owners of the bridge maintaining their property and the easement around it. If it were vandalism, where's the spray painted graffiti?
This looks like what our city does for fire abatement. Every year, the city
comes along and cuts down trees near the road, cuts wild grasses, and clears anything which becomes a fire break for emergency services to access properties in case of fire. You probably need to contact your municipal government and let them know that the property is no longer abandoned and they should contact you if further future abatement is required. They'll probably ignore you, but you can only try. There is usually a department that takes care of "municipal works" and you were probably on a list somewhere as unoccupied land. We all know government departments never talk to each other, so they've no idea you own the land.
I believe it's National Highways that are responsible for maintaining all the bridges, i imagine they have access alongside to keep it clear of trees so that roots can't get into the foundations. Might be worth calling them to clarify the situation.
Irritating as it is the who & why are almost certainly the people responsible for the bridge and a periodic inspection. Those inspections, on a low use bridge can be many years apart. Most of what has gone could well have grown between inspections. Normally you would expect the responsible authority to have notified the land owners, Network rail will even tell local residents that they are going to work on nearby embankments that are 100% railway land. It is possible that they didn't realise that the old station was more occupied and would like/need a notification. A couple of 'private property no trespassing' signs might help. Local authority responsible for the road and Network rail would seem good starting points.
That’s not correct
It’s not network rail, it’s highways agency
If this was vandalized, they would have spray painted the bridge not cleaned it up.
In the US, the government has right of way so many feet from the road. They probably felt they had this and cut it.
Same as the UK it comes under council highway and bridge maintenance. These guys haven't looked into the property maintenance documents I guess.
Yes in US they have an easement of about 8ft from the road, they can do what they want but most of it is cutting trees, because of power lines or infringing on roadway, that ppl can't see around corners & such. I usually end up keeping it maintained so they don't come back for another 5yrs lol
I believe that any bridge crossing a railway that the rail company are responsible for its maintenance however this is a closed line and it depends who actually owns the bridge itself. As others have sugested probably cleared to access for an inspection, bridge vandalism ie filling in with concrete underneith has happened a number of times with the work carried out by the Highways Agency for which they have been taken to court for in recent months for damaging historic structures. I would contact Highways Agency first , then local council then Network Rail however be cautious you don't end up with a big maintainance invoice. I think I saw an oval plaque this should have the bridge number on it although looks worn but they are usually cast numbers and I think one on each side
Great advice, thanks very much 😊
The oval plague seems to be bare, or at least have worn away. Shame.
@@theoldstationrenovation there may be one on the other side probably left as you face the station
Local authority highways team very probably. However, they've transgressed on to your property. Check with them first. If it is, you'd be entitled to compensation, though that's of little consolation at present. You need to signpost the land as Private Property.
More likely, the council will bill them for the work (assuming that there is a rule about keeping the bridge clear).
The highways have the right to clear upto 7ft clearance on bridges and towpaths its not illegal now they know for future maintenance.
I bet there is am implied easement
If the bridge is a listen monument, they have the right to enter private property to maintain it and, in theory, bill the property owners.
Looks great to me.
Check with the town council or maintenance department. Don't think this can be blamed on vandals. Looks more like normal right of way clearing to me.
I don’t think vandals, I actually like seeing the bridge all cleaned up, it shows all of its beauty.
I agree, the bridge is beautiful and we’re happy for it to be cleared. What we were aggrieved about is that they cut down a large chunk of our boundary to get access where if they told us we’d have given access down the drive (and given them a cup of tea).
You should be happy, they've done you a favour clearing the bridge. Please don't spoil this series by becoming complainers.
They didn't want the trees cutting down
They aren’t “complainers” they have a right to be angry. Those trees were on their land. If you take a tree down on municipal land you will face consequences, so same should apply to land owners.
@@lynnbee9384clearly you don't know how municipalities and right-of-way work
Definitely the council did it. It would have been to allow a periodic inspection of the bridge which they are required to do to make sure it is safe to use as the bushes etc would have been needed to get cleared so it could be inspected. The council should have sent you a letter but it is possible they didn't know it was part of your property.
Have a sign outside your fence saying…private property
That only stops people from entering highway maintenance have the right to clear upto 7ft clearance space on bridges and towpaths.
@@user-pi9ko6kv9h also trespassing is a civil offence so the police won’t take any ownership meaning you need to file a case that takes months. Your sign idea is as good a chocolate teapot
4:28 "And where have you been Buddy?"
'Protecting your innocence, now stay in your lane, I got places to be'
I would send them a “thank you” note. The clearing up of the bushes and brambles makes the bridge look so much better. I love the pathways on both sides of the bridge.
Don't know how it works in the UK but in the US the roads, bridges, power lines etc have easements that allow for maintenance and work to be done on such things. Check your real estate documents.
Same in the UK but usually give you notice of any impending, we have a 500,000 volt Pylon going across one of our fields and an hedge by a road and we had 6 months notice of that they were trimming the hedging 20 metres either side of the pylon cables as they had grown within 15 metres of the cables I said carry on they were very good as they had to close the road saved me a job with the tractor, which I did the other 200 metres when they did close the road.
I'd have to agree with Stewart that it's probably the local roads dept./authority. There is probably a small right-of-way immediately surrounding the bridge so that they can do maintenance and upkeep. Contact your local road authority and let them know the property is being upkept. Gil really needs a proper brush hog to get all that overgrowth taken care of.
It looks so much better cleaned up, they did a great job.
The trees that are 6 ft away The roots could undermine the bridge footings. So I believe the local municipal maintenance crew has the obligation to protect the bridge and may have an easement access to do exactly that.
If this was the USA, I would assume whoever owns that bridge also has a easement around it for maintenance. I know you do things differently on your side of the pond. But that wasn't vandalism, that was maintenance. Over here any easement would show up with the deed. I would start with talking to the city or next level of government to find out who maintains the bridge. I also suspect your property line end a bit shy of the bridge, but that is just a guess.
Have you had a survey to lay out the actual property lines?
While you DO own the property, there is a government entity that oversees easement rights around roadways, bridges, rail lines, public utlility lines, etc. The crews were only doing their job and most likely were chastised by superiors for NOT doing it earlier. If anything they did you a favor by clearing that land so you have easier access to it so be careful what you wish for. Plus, they did a good job. You need to learn and understand what went on and also post your property perimeter with "Private Property" and "No Trespassing" signage to disuade actual trespassers and snoopers. BTW: That's the kind of work a good brush hog mower does.
I think they did a marvellous job of clearing overgrowth away from the brickwork! In the previous photos it was a mess of overgrowth and just in the municipals work crews in clean up. Nothing has been done to invade your privacy. I think they have done a brilliant job and it should never have been left for so long. Good work from the municipality.
Tidy vandals...they can come and clear my land any time.
Itll be highways agency or similar, responsible for the bridge, most probably have an agreed access to a certain amount of land around the bridge for maintenance. They cleared it because you or your predecessors didnt!
It's probably the council doing maintenance and providing access to the bridge for inspection.
Feel free to ask them about it, but don't complain or they may charge you for the work as you are the owner of the land, maintenance is your responsibility.
You’re almost certainly right and we’ve no issue with them clearing along the side to inspect but I would have expected to be consulted first, bad form to just turn up and start shredding I feel.
@@theoldstationrenovation They should have given notice, because they have to step on private land. I have the same with electric company keeping land under wires clear. I have no choice but to allow it due to bylaws, but they do give notice when I am to expect them.
@@theoldstationrenovation I believe you told me on a very early video that you are 50% responsible for bridge maintenance. The landowner the other side also 50% responsible. Maybe you need to check your Deeds again if th Council/Highways believe the structure falls under their jurisdiction as well as the road surface.
Yes, absolutely, you should have been given written notice, if not consulted and maybe asked to clear the slope yourselves. We're you all at work/school from early to late all week to not see or hear anything?
@@theoldstationrenovation you may look and see if they did the same thing at St Andrews Rd down the line from your bridge to the south.
Who owns the bridge and who is responsible for its upkeep. Maybe they have right to access the side of the bridge on your land to inspect and maintain the said bridge,Need to get the deeds out.
Your visitors are National Highways, who took over responsibilty for railway structures in September 2013. Their actions have been the subject of much debate and legal action over the past few years. They have reasonable rights of access to their property, but like everone else, they require planning permission to undertake any structural work. Check your property deeds cand boundaries carefully. It would seem your neighbour has erected a fence outside the bridge span. I dont think that any previous owner of the station would have been reckless enough to accept ownership or responsibilty for the bridge structure. This would include the space under it.
To avoid further vandalism, you could speak to your local tree preservation officer for advice. You may consider applying for protection orders for certain trees, after which the National Higways would need to seek planning permission to cut down or even prune branches.
Thank you so much this is great advice and knowledge to have 😀
No trespassing here. Just the municipal doing their job to keep the bridge clear and their easement maintained. They don’t need your approval to clear their easement. Really looks nice now that you can see the bridge. If it were me I would be thanking them.
It is clearly the work of the local government, and if you check the area next to the bridge belongs to the Crown.
My cousin who lives in Scotland his neighbor had the same problem on an old railway bridge over an abandoned track bed, and it was done for an inspection of the bridge. Trees growing close to the bridge can compromise the integrity of the bridge.
While it is your property, the bridge foundation protrudes a couple of meters beyond the walls of the bridge and that area does not belong to you, but the Crown in the UK is what my cousins neighbor found out when he has around the bridge was cleared.
If you look around you may find that other bridges in your are have had the same thing done around them too.
I would check with the Wenvoe council, looking on google maps it looks like they clear around the bridge every few years.
You may get a bill from some authority for clearing out the trees if there is some bylaw that says you're responsible for keeping those areas clear.
I agree with the majority of people who are saying this has improved the bridge , think you have better things to worry about
A whole video about someone who’s done you a massive favour! I hope whoever carried out this work is NOT watching….They are certainly not vandals! The maintenance / council are clearly trying to preserve this Beautiful Bridge. Maybe they did come to your door to say they were starting the work, if you’d been in you would have definitely heard them.Hopefully next video will be about the renovation.
In that case they should have left a note
Whatever entity did this saved you hours of labor. But still you are right in trying to find out who and why this was done.
It was most likely Historical Railways Estate - National Highways, as they have an obligation and right to access and clear old railway infrastructure and they own the bridge.
Huge improvement if you ask me.
Vandals would not have been that thorough. I would put in a security gate and steps into the garden. You've got a better view of the bridge from the station. Call the department that maintains roads and infrastructure.
Contact the local council, it's pretty obvious this is done by someone who want to maintain the bridge! They should have at least informed you of what they needed to do before just cutting everything down! But, I guess that's how it goes when dealing with authorities? 🤔
I can't believe this is a 12 min video.
Trying to save the bridge and looks so much better. Send them a thank you note.
Probably done by local authorities to allow inspection of the bridge and keep the roots from damaging the bridge. It should be done as routine maintenance. Remember that roots can go out as wide as what the tree branches are.
When I saw the title I expected the worst. Thank God it was only the local council or RR doing what they do and doing first and asking questions later. Love watching the progress you are making. Love from the USA.
Clickbait
I'm sure that you cannot own a bridge built by a railway company. Somewhere in some legislation, the railway companies are responsible for all of their structures weather in use or no longer used for the purpose of rail transit. On the other hand, imagine if you did own that bridge and the structure or embankment became structurally unstable, I guess the cost would be astronomical to get it all fixed up.
Surely you must of heard them working there...its not miles away?
The bridge will be the responsibility of the railway. People don’t realise that when they buy a house next to the railway that any railway fence is always inside their boundary so that railway personnel can always maintain it
Looks great all cleared😊 now you can see the beautiful bridge
I think it was the Local Council or Railway Company. If they have the responsibility for the Bridge Upkeep they would have "Right Of Access" over your property!!!
Clearance of the area around the bridge would be for "Bridge Inspection"
The Local Planning office or Your Purchase Docouments for Your Property would have these details.
I think the Council or the Railway Company should have Contacted You First.
Best Wishes. 🍀🍀🍀🍀🍀🍀
I would expect a public bridge to have some form of easement around it meaning the council would be well with their rights to clear under the bridge for both maintenance and inspection purposes. So worth investigating if the bridge does have an easement zone which does not fall within your ownership.
I would check the Sale agreement and your property lines, maybe there is a clause in there that allows the council/train company to come and clear it if its over growing the bridge for structural reasons? Its worth checking just incase theres something missed when you bought the property! Good luck!
G'day from Australia 🇦🇺 ❤ I truly do agree with most of the comments here about the clearing of the railway bridge. It does look better 😊.. it wasn't vandals... maintenance checks on structures. I understand your concerns about it, it's your property 😊😊 can't wait for next video...❤😊😊
I agree it looks like maintenance. That ivy can get in the stones and destroy it. It can also kill mature trees. I have it and it does.
It looks like a clearing job to me and vandals leave a mess. In my opinion they have cleared the bridge nicely, put some stump paint on to stop regrowth and be thankful the job has been done for you. It would have been nice if they had asked first or told you of their intentions,
Completely agree, no problem with them clearing what they had to but if they’d contacted us they could have come down the drive and not cut away a chunk of the boundary hedge to get access!
In Australia 🦘 council would have done the same and billed you for it. Your job is to clearly maintain around the bridge in your clearly neglected yard.
Old railway bridges and other structures used to be maintained by the British Railway Board, this eventually became the Historical Railway Estate National Highways. That is clearly not vandalism .
Has to be highway or railway authority. It might be your property but they may have an easement with rights to so many feet to get to the Bridge. Call them to find out and ask them to remove the brush and trees they cut instead of dumping on your property.
wow definitely an improvement I am sure it's for bridge inspection
Definitely an improvement, our issue is that to get access they’ve cut away a large chunk of the bushes that protect the boundary. If they’d contacted us first we’d have let them come down the drive and made them a cup of tea!
Read the covenants in your legal documents. All historic Railway companies were very good at protecting their infrastructure, this work is normally perfectly legal, just because it’s your land dosnt mean they don’t have access to carry out maintenance.
If your local authority is anything like mine you will get a letter in three weeks telling you about the planned maintenance. 🤣
I don't think vandals cut the lawn and trim trees 😂
Next they will be painting walls and repairing public toilets.
Could be council, but railway bridges come under network Rail I think.
Sorry that your miffed that the local road crew finally did their job with maintainence. Your place has been abandoned for how long? Let the department that handled maintainence know the property has been sold. Personally I think that mess looks much better with the clean up. We would be fined if our property looked like that.
You can also post your property as private, didnt see any signs so how would work crews know?
If the vegetation is on your property then there's a legal requirement to offer it back to you.
It is a good thing, you all have your hands full. I am sure they have clearance rules too.
I’m pretty sure there is an automatic right of access for railway bridges to ensure they are safe and to carry out bridge maintenance. There will be something similar for bridges etc carrying public highways. I think for maintenance they normally advise but not needed for inspection. Best to check with council as they will have the relevant documents etc
Most likely cleared to inspect the bridge. (Highway Authority?). Such a shame they didn't bother to give you notice of their intentions.