*We would like to thank everyone for their support, we sincerely appreciate it, thank you.* Our Gofundme is to help with the things like the survey and legal expenses. www.gofundme.com/f/588854-altnabreac-cover-up
why does the rope mark a 90 degree angle? it seems like one fence post would be outside of your land markings, the part where the chains were cut if this rope is to be believed.
I would go to court & ask for reparation of costs plus interest & costs for anxiety & stress to be awarded to you for their bullying tactics. ( I saw P2 as well.) Where you ARE PROVEN TOTALLY CORRECT. Cops were just told this was the bosses decision go. SO SAD.
@altnabreac absolutely commend you for engaging the services of a civil engineering firm to survey your property and place temporary markers. I encourage you to have permanent markers placed by the surveyor. If you haven't already done so have an Engineering firm draw a current plat map of your property that includes permanent landmarks. Have a solicitor file a certified copy of said updated plat map drawing with the court.
I think the rope is only a rough guide to the boundary for us to see. If you look at the fence you will see there’s a wooded peg banged into the ground right next to the fence showing the boundary line. Also you would have to line that peg up with the next peg along (which is shown in another video) so until you see them lined up we don’t know if it goes off in an angle or not. But going by the gentleman who owns the land. He mentioned that the other side of the grid is owned by an investment company and another bit by the School House. Land disputes seem to drag on forever and drain you of a load of money. A relation of mine had a dispute over 4 inches of land down the side of there house which delayed there sale by months.
@Du1uxDog I see wooden stakes as temporary markers. Wood decades faster than metal will corode or oxidize. Permanent markers are usually rebar or iron pipe.
@@AlmostLastJedi If you had a dispute over land ownership with your neighbour and called the police, do you really think they would even turn up for a civil matter, let alone get deeply involved?
I'm sure the homeowners will and what's more they shall probably win, however the wrongdoers will not suffer any personal consequences financially or loss of position. In the end taxpayers and rail users will pay for this. The bad publicity is probably the best weapon ordinary people have against these corporatist entities.
I would put chain back up and if they turn up again tell them that they will be charged with trespass and inform the police as its a civil matter they can't cross until it has been resolved in court
@andrewtrip8617 so what you are saying is that it's OK for them to bring big machines onto your land without your permission public right off way is defined as passing through as they would have to ask permission to big equipment onto there land
@@ianflynn2353 I've had a lengthy boundary dispute myself, albeit under English law, plus a Right of Way issue, but rights of access are slightly different, often contractual and outlined in title deeds, as Covenants.. Right of Way (for the public) is Access and Egress, that is a way in and a way out, has to go somewhere, rather than come in to a garden for example, then leave.
I suggest that you invite Network rail advising of this development and invite them to make an offer of compensation for the aggravated trespass and false claims of ownership of your property which caused you harassment, alarm and distress. You could also ask for their proposals for seeking permission to access your property for any future work that may need to be done. Further ask NR to explain the precise basis on which they accessed the property under the previous owners and the precise basis on which they changed that arrangement. I suggest that you also write to Plod and invite them to comment on their actions which were based on a total misunderstanding of the legal position of ownership asking them to provide the evidence presented to them that allowed them to make such assertions with threats of arrest which also caused you harassment, alarm and distress. In both cases you could add that you are giving each party the opportunity to remedy fundamental breaches of your property rights and that any further action you take will be determined by their response.
Not to mention reinstating the parts of the property where they have built a path back to how it was, and replacing any trees that were on your land and removed
@@ALTNABREAC As a lawyer, not an internet trained lawyer, albeit not licensed in your country but in Australia may I offer a suggestion? Before listening to internet commentators: Call a lawyer. Do not offer them a cut, that's what they'll want if they're corporate focused.
What people may not know is that this sort of corruption, threats, etc, is endemic across police, civil service, agencies, etc. They know they will get away with it, and even when they are losing, they will create an 'offence' just to ruin you life. The judiciary are not interested as they are required to keep their successful conviction rates as high as possible, other wise their careers are sidelined.
I live in So Cal and when I got the survey done on my property I made a request to have a concrete monument, not a wooden stake because the crazy neighbor would have taken it out. She wanted 10 feet of my property, took me 1 year to finally get her off.
As a former BR/RT/NR employee we always argued against selling stations and the surrounding areas. They were sold of by RT a costly mistake you shpuld never sell railway infrastructure and access to anyone.
As I understand it NR can apply for a CPO and reclaim the property at current market rates. I am really hoping some at NR does this and send these two scroungers packing.
I have accidently come across this channel. I am no expert, but a fan of disused stations as my Uncle owns old station buildings in Scotland. Anyway, I happened to just glance at old maps of your area..... OS six inch 1888-1915, OS 1:25000 , 1937-1961, OS 1:25000 (Outline) 1945 - 65, OS 1:1 million - 1: 10k 1900's etc etc and they all back you up with the boundary you state. Unless they have been wrong since 1888, then it looks like Network rail are trying to pull a fast one. Good luck in your quest and at the end, I hope you win a substantial sum for the stress.
I had a dispute with neighbours and had to get a surveyor in. Our surveyor drove a rebar painted blue like 600mm deep, flush with the ground. I was told to put in my own pegs at a distance to triangulate the surveyor peg in case it was removed. I 2 of inserted my own pegs about 3 meters away. It was good enough to find the surveyor peg again. I can tell you that I needed this when I discovered that someone removed the blue pegs on one side of my property.
Good move getting the boundary confirmed professionally because it should be accepted as a professional survey document qualifying your property boundary.
The big problem is that the Railway Company's sold off so much land, but they didn't think it though. It's happened up and down the country . Sorry I can't send any money as I am a pensioner and you know what the Government have done to us. Good luck with your fight. Willy.
Hi Willy, just by you commenting on this video supports us, and we very much appreciate it. You have a lovely weekend and thanks so much for watching. BTW We are against what the government have done to you, are you managing to stay warm and have food though?
Dear sir and madam, i am of the same opinion as Willy and pretty much in the same boat. The blatant chicanery and skulduggery of some people involved in maintaining that you don’t own the track is clear to any “reasonable person” (as described by Lord Diplock in the case of DPP v Camplin). Do they honestly believe that they can ride roughshod over what is your boundary or curtilage of your property and has been defined by the qualified surveyor, do they even know of the expression “due diligence” . If they continue to harass you with their egregious and clearly erroneous claims then they need to be taken to the highest court in the land, it’s a matter of principle and also that right will and must be done , as in the case of the Winslow Boy. All the best to both of you.
Willy....I am a wealthy pensioner and I consider it a prudent move by Kier Starmer to stop giving free money to people like me. If you really are poor then you will still get your free winter money.
correct me if I'm wrong but Network Rail aren't claiming they own the land are they? Instead they are claiming they have right of access over the land. That's a very important distinction.
Sorry if someone has mentioned this already. Registered titles mark general boundaries, not the actual boundary. Best to check the actual property title. If you dont have this it will be with your morgage company and you can purchase a copy off them. It is known as 'paper title', this still needs applying to site features. So, NR might own that land or have rights of access and a conveyancing mistake shows otherwise. Or the oppostie. The professionals involved should have picked this up.
Also the title deeds not only show ownership but any other caveats like the rights of others to “pass and repass” over land to reach other owners land - which is very common on tracks and roads leading to somewhere where you have to travel over adjacent land owners land to reach your destination.
As the ownership of the land is in dispute I cannot see how the pursuit by either party will resolve the issue. This requires a determination by the Court, pure and simple. Boundary disputes are one of the most difficult areas as far too often the Land Registry Title relies on vague definitions, often by a red line around the property, which at scale is over 1m wide. In our digital age and with the technology available it should be incumbent on a party selling the land to provide accurate location information by fine detail map references that are then checked and confirmed by neighbouring property owners. At present the Land Registry, far from defining the true ownership of land as it is supposed to do, still leaves it to property owners to fight it out, each probably citing the LR vague mapping as definitive.
Look at the title plan. The white strip which SR claim and is not disputed is only about 2.7m [9'] wide - about the same width as the house-extension with the door. In the films of the cattle-grid and driveway/house the gap from the edge of that extension to the white strip is about 5.5m [18']. Note that all dimensions are estimated on the visual evidence and proportions in plan. it seems to me that about 3m [10'] of the driveway [gray] up past the shed is inside the title boundary. However a strip of the drive-way [which is the white strip], that is SR's, initially takes up a bit under half of the driveway's width along the trees/bushes [approximating to the worn 'rut' in the gravel along the grass-verge/tree line, and then bends slightly away from the house, widening to around 3/3.3m [10/11'] at the station end. In fact the line demarcating the boundary is approximately in line with the lamppost by the platform and a line of plant-pots on the drive. So, the SR's strip [white] is a narrow pathway along the edge of the house's supposed driveway, while the house's owned driveway is a somewhat wider strip, widening after the shed. That is to say that two owners in dispute have a limited width of access past the shed, but of course the house owner could sacrifice same of the grassed area by the shed for a wider drive wholly within there cartilage. SR could widen their [white] access into the tree/bushes. It's suitable for pedestrians etc, but probably too narrow to get anything but domestic sized vehicles down it as it stands. I am surprised that there wasn't a legal agreement tied up with the land sales allowing some access over at least some of the house's driveway up to the station. The path built by SR perpendicular to the drive-way seems to fall entirely within their land. The matter of the cattle-grid and side gate is weird the splayed boundary lines offer both land owners restricted with access - about 1.7m for the house and 2m for SR, with both owners needing access over the cattle-grid which is owned in the main by the forestry company who also control the access round up to it - which incidentally is drawn about the same with as the hose's drive including the SR white strip. The splayed boundary is not reflected by what's on site and needs clarification, currently as built [by whom?] it provides about 60:40% of its width for SR:house. Surely there must be some existing legal agreements in place between all three parties, allowing 'shared' access through this pinch-point otherwise it's unsatisfactory for the house/SR. The householder could erect a gate over their 40% of the cattle-grid, thwarting SR's reasonable width access, conversely SR could block their side with a gate, but that might be petty with neither side winning. oddly the side gate to the cattle-grid is built entirely on the forestry company's land, as is the access path to the side of the driveways to circumvent the grid - as is clear from following the splayed boundary line across this plan area and in photographs. The new path SR built seems to just miss this boundary oddity, but might infringe slightly nearest the grid/gate. So SR do NOT own the house's drive, but SR probably own a strip of it by the trees. Without agreements it would be unsuitable for heavy vehicle access. The cattle-grid access rights need to be agreed by 3 parties as currently it suits no one. I hope this 'second-opinion' helps you all get a resolution that's mutually satisfactory. SR have been very heavy-handed, but the householder obstructing their access across the cattle-grid was wrong, even if the share of its width is narrow they could move small plant and machinery over it. SR should not have claimed to own the whole drive-way, although they might have some agreed rights of access that have not been presented, but failure to do so by them is unsatisfactory. The BTP can get involved in trespass issues, but they offered no real proof to the householder as to why they believed SR over them. Both SR and the householder are wrong to some extent. Surely SR must have something that they can provide to the householder regarding extended access rights along this edge of the drive - SR certainly don't own the whole driveway, the plan is clear on that.
Well done for standing up to Network rail and the smug creeps who work for them and the police hierarchy who obviously are in co with them, sue the lot of them! There a disgrace and you are heroes!
Ahhh good stuff, you took my advice getting a cadastral surveyor to peg your boundaries. He should provide a plan as well of that pegging. You can use that in court . The Torrens system is a wonderful thing.
Wow Network Rail are really showing there True colors with the bully boys. Mr Smith won't be so when court decide the land belongs too you. I'm following this with great interest unfortunately I'm not in the position to help fund your fight. Hope the outcome goes well
Well thery should of done that in the first place, but they didn't, they have bullied and harassed this couple because. A. They think they own "access", but they don't. B. See A because it's easier
Hello from down under ,( Australia) the UK and Australian laws are basically the same , so my advice to you is to find a local justice of the piece and get him as a witness to their actions and show him your documentation and survey reports because a mjudge in court will very very rarely dispute a JPs statment of word being the judge doesn't want to get up in the small hours of the morning or on weekends to hear remand or warrent hearings its the JP the police wake up so the JPs work is almost sacrosanct
I'm really interested to see how this progresses, because their solicitors and upper management drafting in workers and police while ignoring a legal challenge to land is just disgusting. Its so clear what they are doing, clear as day.
I think i would be following on the fence from the cattle grid on the east side and down the track establishing exactly what is mine and on my land. Then cut out an access public footpath for the access.
The paper title would generally show if there is an access allowed to a third party - in this case network rail. If not, then that’s on them to provided adequate compensation for actual right of access, not an imagined or implied one. Now remember, it’s BR or NR that sold the property in the first place, and if they failed to make it clear that they would maintain an access post sale, then tough luck on them. They know you can basically charge commercial rates on land theyd like access over (it’s called a ransom strip for a reason) and my guess is that the deed doesn’t allow for access and they know it. So in steamrollering you, then they hope you’ll run out of cash to fight them.
( BTP ) DONT GO ON YOUR OPINION GO BY THE LAW... ( BTP ) ENFORCE THE LAW NOT BE A LAP-DOG TO CORPORATE CORRUPTION ...( BTP ) BOW YOUR HEADS IN TOTAL SHAME & YOU WONDER WHY ?
Sounds like either NWR own the lane and you have an easement or you own it, and they have an easement. Either way they would have access. Can’t see possible adverse possession (ie exclusivity) so only leaves incorrectly recorded on the land registry - so a court matter
I believe the station building was first sold in the 1960's and the station area 'carved out' as an island within the wider land. How does the 1960's title deed of your house describe the boundaries? Let's hope not, but It's perfectly possible for the land to have been incorrectly registered, and comparing GPS co-ordinates with a land registry plan would unfortunately be immaterial if the land wasn't registered correctly in the first place. My understanding is that any surveying needs to be relative to a point of reference which exists on the title deed, and the surveying should be aiming to clarify things relative to the title deed, not the land registry plan.
Thanks for the update. Call me cynical, but at around 16:10 on this video, it shows the surveyor plotting the Eastern boundary, neatly past the end (or beginning) of the new NR footpath. It's almost as if they knew exactly where the boundary actually was! ;)
NR have known all along we own our own driveway. They tried to steal our land and hoped we couldn't afford a surveyor and wouldn't go to court but thanks to our supporters helping us, we got a surveyor!
Have a look at the ground under the peg by the cattle grid in the video. They buried a cable there and they have definitely caused damage to part of our registered title. 👍
They probably do know who owns the land, but have a registered right of access. I unfortunately have a number of rights of ways and easements giving various companies the right to do work on my land. The power company have an underground cable which gives them right of access at any time and I can not cover it in any way, ie pave over it, store anything on top of it. From my understanding they own the "driveway" up to the cattle grid and have some kind of Easement or Right of Way in order to carry out the work on that footpath.
@@thedogsdiddies8421 If that were the case, NR would have produced evidence of easement (or whatever they're called in Scots law) and resolved the dispute ages ago.
Not necessarily, it costs money to do these things and most people won't fight it. In my experience its best to work with them unless you are absolutely loaded and have money to fight them, but make sure you understand the law and things like rights of way, easements, etc
I've been where you are. When you are fighting a bully the only solution is the courts. ££££££. These bullies know this and that's why they are pushing.
Well done to both of you for sticking with it. Maybe you should claim, once it has all be sorted, for the distress and fees THEY have MADE you go through!!!!! Maybe you should claim against both NWR and BTP :)
Excellent, that is one step completed. No doubt NR would like to engage their own surveyor, but can’t see type result being any different. The next step maybe a court to decide on access rights of NR. Anyway thank you for the enlightening update and good luck for the next step.
Two different Surveyors have shot the boundaries of our property using GPS in the last 3 years and their stakes are a foot apart. We are now measuring in millimeters property lines that were laid out decades and sometimes centuries ago using iron chains or rope. The irritating part in this case is it looks like there is plenty of room right next to the railroad track itself for them to use as a right-of-way.
US when a developer wanted to build houses on a tract of land near my parents house, strangely all the land markers moved in the valley to give the developer what they wanted, more property for them less for everyone around them. Strange how survey markers travel to enable development. The survey markers were from the 30's, and did not have geo location markers, it was 1000 ft from x "metal post marked 13 from xxx survey completed in 19xx".
In the U.S. surveyors drive long, steel pegs into below ground level so if there is a dispute, they can be found with a metal detector at a later date.
@@andrewtrip8617 if they drive steel rods they also use a metal detector to make sure they are not hitting power, cable or water lines. BLUF: It’s incredibly hard for someone to remove a 3 foot steel rod from the ground that marks your land boundaries.
I think the key is actually the land to the north-east of your house. Given the title plan is definitive, if NR did own the track then there would not be a small area of lawn next to your house. So the plan needs to be interpreted to include that area, plus an area of lawn near the building that is near the gate. You can then fill in the boundary. The surveyor really should address the bit with the arrow, since that is the whole cause of the problem. Even if just to say that it once was an area not covered in trees and hence that's why it appears as such on the map.
It's interesting to go back to the 1900's maps and see how the road layout was then. maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/side-by-side/#zoom=19.6&lat=58.38800&lon=-3.70564&layers=6&right=GoogleSatHyb - It's not quite lined up, but again it shows what the original road does go up to the side of the house.
I'm proper happy for you guys to now have evidential proof of your boundary, hopefully the YT comments section solicitors will now wind their necks in and realise they aren't solicitors
@@andrewtrip8617 Well technically right of way doesn't apply to private houses and garden in Scotland for one. I also don't think you understand what a cynic is and why you have drawn the conclusion I mistaken realist, fantasist and cynic. I chose that word as from your rhetoric, that is how it appears, for example "Success at what exactly". If you would like to go into the philosophy of that I am happy to oblige. If anyone wants to waste their money which I don't agree they are, but, lets for arguments sake say they are, that is their prerogative not yours or mine. If anyone wants to make content or as you call it entertainment on UA-cam, then again that is their prerogative not yours or mine. Now personally I want people to be happy and be successful in their lives, I don't want people in anyway to have bad or negative things happen to them, now I would argue that your rhetoric is very negative and not positive, you clearly don't want these people to be happy hence your negative responses. What I will ask is why you feel the need to be negative to these people whether you personally believe its a realist position or not as being a realist can be extremely negative and we have enough negativity in the world without adding to it.
Love that you now have the Truth and its proof your not some nutters from the wilds, that you have a fully mapped out boundary...Happy days, sit back and smile your legends and stood firmly on your ground and it is your land so lets see what the fools parade will say next! proper job, I shall be raising a dram to you both tonight! one love Ian and Elizabeth
I'm confused as to your claim, please correct me if I've got it wrong, I'm sure that during one of your earlier videos of the NWR workmen starting work as they were taking down a fence and cutting down trees and bushes in the area of the new path you stated in that video that they were taking down your fence and cutting down your trees on your land. I'm sure you videoed areas of land where the new path was going which included a washing line drying area That video to me suggested that NWR were laying claim vast swages of your land, which got my dander up against NWR but now in this video its about the drive. Don't get me wrong I am on your side but I'm now unclear as to what injustice I'm supporting you on ? May I suggest a video of you walking your boundary and showing the whole area at eye level with reference points using buildings and the new path will help to make things more clear to a thicko like me. Best regards
You’re not a thicko at all. They are ignoring this question on mass scale it seems and have mislead everyone in regards to the wooded area where the path was built. I supported them at first but I’m quite annoyed that they told us they owned that area when it’s clear they did not. The damage they claimed the rail company did to their property was probably a major factor in people supporting, and none of that was even true. They need to explain why they said that, because if it was just a mistake they need to issue a correction, otherwise it’s clear that was all just to draw an emotional response from viewers
Clear nonsense. As if network rail was ever going to sell any property without retaining a right of access to maintain their infrastructure. Clever editing and half information.
This is excellent, let's see now if the Courts are honest on this occasion and accept the irrefutable Fact that this is indeed your property. Perhaps an FOI request regarding the sinister meeting between BTP and Network Raii and or their legal team in which they came up with the lies about who has ownership of the drive of your property would be prudent
Establish which stakeholders were invited, attended and who should have been consulted who was not - you, for instance. Regard that meeting as an internal corporate NR/BTP meeting which would have been an internal echo chamber for them to agree among themselves they were correct and you were wrong - don’t worry about it. They make the process itself a punishment by the way they act and it is deliberate and bullying.
You will not get anything from a FOI request between a client and their legal team in terms of what was discussed at a meeting. At best you might get their recommendations .
@@robotsonmars1989 the police are not a client, they are public servants who must remain unbiased and they most certainly were not that in this instance, in fact they appear to be fellow conspirators. Now legal advice for Network Rail from their legal teams is obviously not suitable for an FOI request but discussion between them and the BTP most certainly is... They will obfuscate without a doubt but it's worth exposing the conspirators further if possible
Well done guys, unbelievable you’ve both been put through this. I’m not even going to comment on the BTP they should be utterly ashamed of themselves, I hope you both receive a written apology from BTP it’s the minimum you guy deserve, unbelievable smh 🤦🏻♂️
Even if you 100% "own" it.... They can still have use of it under the right "circumstances" and can "pass and repass etc".... Been there, done that and got the T-shirt. Neighbour thought he was right and we were wrong.... Unfortunately, we were basically right and he was 99% wrong.... As proven by the barrister and ruled on by the judge. 2 years of life wasted. ..... Oh... And it was fruitless to him in the end as he had to sell his house to pay our costs aswell as his own.....
I notice the police say it's 'their opinion' that the driveway is owned by British transport. It isn't the police's job to have legal opinion, that is for the courts. Police shouldn't be involved in a land dispute like this until a court has ruled on the matter and that ruling can then be enforced by police if necessary. Who the hell do these police think they are that they can make and enforce judgments based on their own opinion. This is totally a civil matter and police have no business getting involved at all. They are just wasting police resources bullying a party in a legal dispute, it's disgraceful.
100% correct analysis of the situation. BTP 'senior management team' decided we did not own our driveway.... Thank you for your great comment and support!
@LizAltnabreac-u8h You are welcome, stuff like this makes me sick, especially when police are constantly whining that they have no resources yet they can send out cars with multiple officers to intimidate you guys when there is court ruling to be enforced. Absolutely unacceptable.
A question you should also ask you local council or shire is what yardage have you been rated or land taxed on , and is there any registered easement attached to your property title these may not be shown on the title its self
I went through something similar, my neighbor tried to take my driveway from me…it took three years and many thousands of dollars to resolve. We eventually won in court.
Just looked at the first 4 minutes and am confused already. On the plan it shows a 45 degree angle on the corner of your plot. However the angle between the orange rope and yellow rope is 90 degrees?
same sort of thing happened to a couple who brought a disused station the rail company can still access their property for clearways as there is a bridge at one end of their property
I'm not a surveyor, but as I look at the map with the red arrow it appears to me that the point of the arrow is on what you are referring to as your driveway and the tail of the arrow is in your property. So, unless you have an easement where the driveway is, it cannot be considered part of your property, per the survey. I don't know who/what owns the property on which the driveway resides, but, as I said, unless there's a legal easement stating you have access to this driveway you are in a world of hurt, or in other words, you're landlocked, altho' I can't see the rest of your property to see if there is access on any other side, etc. Good luck is all I can say to you.
The whole driveway is within our registered title. We do not need an easement over our own land....I'm not sure what you're looking at but you are wrong.
@@LizAltnabreac-u8h I'm happy I was misinterpreting the map and that the entire driveway in on your land. Land squabbles can be very stressful and I hope this is entirely behind you.
I've just found this randomly. AND, I'm all for justice, etc but I can't see what Network Rail want to DO on your/the land?? Just pass by to get to the track? Install some equipment? Would it be something permanent, done daily or once in a couple of years? Can't you just allow them access???
Exactly this, they just want to get to the platform (which NR own), do an inspection, fit a bike rack, some comms equipment and a remote control button to request the traisn to stop. Until the platform can be inspected, they can't have stopping trains, so many walkers and cyclists are unable to access huge areas of the land becasue these two twits won't let Network Rail get to the platform to do work for the public good.
NR need to do things lawfully. We have always shown a willingness to try and work with NR and even offered to grant them a temporary access licence a week before these videos. NR ignored our offer and instead chose to falsely claim to own our driveway and used their biased BTP officers to threaten to arrest us for trespass on our own land if we tried to stop NR coming onto OUR LAND. BTP gave the workers the nod to cut our lock to our chain to our driveay! Totally unlawful.
@@itsverygreen532 NR need to do it LAWFULLY! If they decide to act honestly and do it the right way, then things may progress. How can you not understand this!
As clear as mud. The makers promise to to tell what has happened - all the detail - but, as usual, fail miserably. The 'evidence' produced is not convincing, but then it's not clear what the case is all about. There are no dates, no timescale, no indication of why Network Rail want access etc etc. We are shown 'maps' which prove absolutely nothing. I am amazed at the patience and good nature of the police involved who have to put up with all this. Though I bet they get a laugh out of it - because it is funny! It's a comedy and I am beginning to think this is all an attempt by that great British TV director Mike Leigh to make a new version of his 1976 BBC Play for Today starring Alison Steadman and Roger Sloman as Candice-Marie and Keith Pratt [sic] - dead ringers for this couple. It's called 'Nuts in May'. Enough said.
'Clear as mud'? Did you not watch the video? Network Rail claimed to own the driveway. They don't. The surveyor proved the landowners were correct all along. What more evidence do you need....BTP won't be laughing for long! If you think it's 'funny' that a company is trying to land grab, then there's something seriously wrong with you! I doubt you'd find it 'funny' if were you or a member of your family. Idiot.
@@Rob1970-b9t Maybe my reply was 'unacceptable' - it didn't get posted so I'll try again... Pity Rob1970 didn't read my comments. The surveyor proved nothing, and did little on film except bash in a few boundary posts. The videos are so badly made and edited (edited??) that they are confusing because Candice-Marie (aka Elizabeth); and Keith Pratte (aka Ian) fail to put over basic information such as dates and events (when did this all happened? When were they up in court? what happened about the court hearing?) and fail to provide any significant maps. If they want to prove ownership, they need to show us the relevant land registry/deeds and other relevant documents. Simple 'statements' are not facts. Why don't they simply give Network Rail access - which will in no way affect their 'property' - apart from some possible inconvenience in the short term - and the whole matter can be over in no time? Which would give 'Candice_Marie' and 'Keith' time to get different bees in their bonnets and bother other people. They'd be so bored I guess if this all ended...
@@chrisbazlinton The title of the video confirms that the surveyor proved that the 'driveway is 100% within registered boundary' - 100% means ALL unless you do not understand what 100% means...This proves the driveway NR claim to own cannot be owned by them because 100% of it (i.e. ALL of it), is owned by the landowners. That is the evidence. Seems like you need to learn basic English. Access onto someone else's land requires PERMISSION. NR is trying to do things underhandedly and trying to claim their land instead of seeking their permission to use their land. If you think it's okay for NR to go around claiming people's land as their own then let them come and use your land. Seems like you are just easily confused! The majority of people watching this video aren't confused.
@@Rob1970-b9t You just don't read. Just because the 'title' says that, it means nothing. Neither the surveyor nor these two have proved anything. Basic English? Don't make me laugh again!.. And Network Rail have no reason to use my land - they do in this case and have provided a station for 150 years at the site. Meanwhile, the Applebys are effectively depriving rail passengers of the use of the station… Btw it appears one of Rob1970s posts has ‘disappeared’ - perhaps he thought better of it.
@@chrisbazlinton I do not why my post has disappeared - I did not remove it. NR is depriving rail passengers the use of the station by dragging things out acting unlawfully. That is the bottom line. Go whine to them.
In Australia survey pegs must be driven in to the ground leaving only 3 inches above ground with the top marked in red and a cross cut in the top this becomes a legal documented boundry point beyond reproach
Stay strong. I'm Australian. I had the pleasure of meeting people from Registers of Scotland at a conference of land registration authorities quite a few years ago. My recollection is that the land title registration system in Scotland is very sound, well regulated, and transparent. I'm quite surprised that the police and rail people you are dealing with seem to have no interest in the text of your title and the referenced cadastral information. Regarding your current court case, it appears that the police and rail people are challenging the Registers of Scotland (ROS), and as such ROS should be joined in the court action. I hope you are able to establish that point with the court and with ROS. I do hope this is resolved quickly now that you are at court. All the best to you, and may you prevail.
@@Nigel-f8w yes I am familiar with title plans and mapping. I have worked in the office of the Registrar General and Surveyor General of South Australia. I have worked in the field with surveyors, and I've prepared survey drawings of land surveys that I assisted with. Where I live the Certificate of Title is the primary source of land ownership. It references a Deposited Plan in the Surveyor General's repository. The Government guarantees title based on those two documents. My understanding, having spent time with people from RoS, is that the system in Scotland is very similar. I haven't seen the plan. I'm confident the Surveyor who pegged the boundaries recently has accessed the property data. Can you please explain what your point is?
@@Nigel-f8w unless the cadastral map is referenced by the land title it has no legal standing as a definition of property ownership. Cadastral maps are descriptive rather than definitive. The property titles, and the survey plans they reference, are definitive. That's their purpose - to unambiguously define each property along with any and all interests in that defined property. All interests, whether they are liens, mortgages, rights of way, encumbrances, etc are declared on the title (including the referenced survey plan). If not, they do not affect the propriety of the parcel of land. All of this should be considered in the court case. There's no point arguing on social media about cadastral maps and the like. My point stands - that this case should enjoin the ROS, the authority entrusted by the government to define the Interests in land property.
Did you verify the 4 other limits ? Is the SouthWest limit matching your expectation ? Did you cross check with the result of the land surveyor with the size and area of your land ?
Now you need to put in a security fence along all you boundaries and keep a record of your property on hand for future reference. As everything on the other side of that boundary the rail company are responsible for. Simple solution to all the problems.
In this video you show the boundary of your land pertaining to the cattle grid and driveway, the orange line shows the limit down the cattle grid, and the yellow line across the cattle grid. Your padlock and chain extended beyond your legal boundary, as noted by the yellow line, so you are trespassing on land that is not yours, as you say in this video it belongs to some forestry commission, who also own the rest of the driveway beyond your orange line. Scottish rail may have trespassed on to your land, but the lock isn’t on your land. So it’s the forestry people that need to get involved at this point, as according to your boundary the land is owned by them. I agree totally that Scottish rail then proceeds to trespass on to your land in order to carry out their necessary works, but don’t keep harping on about the lock and chain, as it’s actually not within your boundary. They could have sort the forestry commission’s permission to cut the lock and you wouldn’t have a leg to stand on as it’s not yours, self admission shows this in your boundary markers
Glad to see you are still standing firm against the bullying of NR and the BTP’s corrupt and biased support of NR in their attempt to steal your land. I truly hope they learn a valuable lesson about trying to use their size to pressure landowners into surrendering their rights and that they are forced to publicly admit their guilt as well as compensate you both for the hell they have put you through.
Morning, yes we hope lessons can be learned from this. We often talk about this old man that used to run a barbers that had been in his family for ever. Well the big corporations bought the whole street to bulldoze them all down, the old man didn't want to move, they flattened everything around his little shop, he stood his ground, he wouldn't move. Appreciate your comment, thank you 👍
so they grew a hedge on their boundary and because the map says the hedge is/was further back they claimed your land? how much can you sue for trespass and intimidation and costs including the surveyor which they should have done? (And damage to property)
you can see Network Rails error and it was on there maps all along there access is where those trees have all grown that bit of grey track is right next to your land - they have made a major massive error and stress and hassle and abuse you have got from Network Rail and BTP is unreal when someone realises this they are going to be swearing under their breaths somewhat !
And this is absolutely correct, I worked on the railway for many years including pre privatisation, the first thing that went was maintenance of the track sides and vegetation control, all those trees that have grown are seeded not planted, that is their track, if you want to call it that! It's plain as day and maps, title plans etc and yet they are blind to it, there must be some old photos somewhere that rail enthusiasts have taken which will show that area of land before the wild growth of plant life took over. Network rail are like ground water, they will take the path of least resistance, first they thought they could just by-pass you and secondly instead of clearing all that area in the other side of your boundary and creating a straight path( which of course would cost money getting all the trees out) they just chose to cut a little segway and lay a path over the top of clear land. Quite ironic in a way because when the railways where first designed they followed the path of least resistance by following contours of the land to save of digging, hence why we have bendy railways.
I'm not clued up on this stuff but get solicitors involved, take this as an opportunity to make money, you own part of the land and must pay you to use that land
With the marker pegs laid out by the survivor, marking out your property line. This is where you should be putting up a fence all the way around your property and gate with a bolt-cutter proof lock.
*We would like to thank everyone for their support, we sincerely appreciate it, thank you.*
Our Gofundme is to help with the things like the survey and legal expenses.
www.gofundme.com/f/588854-altnabreac-cover-up
why does the rope mark a 90 degree angle? it seems like one fence post would be outside of your land markings, the part where the chains were cut if this rope is to be believed.
I would go to court & ask for reparation of costs plus interest & costs for anxiety & stress to be awarded to you for their bullying tactics. ( I saw P2 as well.) Where you ARE PROVEN TOTALLY CORRECT. Cops were just told this was the bosses decision go. SO SAD.
@altnabreac absolutely commend you for engaging the services of a civil engineering firm to survey your property and place temporary markers. I encourage you to have permanent markers placed by the surveyor.
If you haven't already done so have an Engineering firm draw a current plat map of your property that includes permanent landmarks. Have a solicitor file a certified copy of said updated plat map drawing with the court.
I think the rope is only a rough guide to the boundary for us to see. If you look at the fence you will see there’s a wooded peg banged into the ground right next to the fence showing the boundary line. Also you would have to line that peg up with the next peg along (which is shown in another video) so until you see them lined up we don’t know if it goes off in an angle or not.
But going by the gentleman who owns the land. He mentioned that the other side of the grid is owned by an investment company and another bit by the School House.
Land disputes seem to drag on forever and drain you of a load of money. A relation of mine had a dispute over 4 inches of land down the side of there house which delayed there sale by months.
@Du1uxDog I see wooden stakes as temporary markers. Wood decades faster than metal will corode or oxidize.
Permanent markers are usually rebar or iron pipe.
Why are Police getting involved in a civil matter, this stinks.
British Transport police.
If someone right now stopped you from getting to your house and said they owned the land, who would you call?
@@AlmostLastJedian ambulance!!
to come and pick the beat up guy left at the gate,
I'm sure it comes under "Keeping the peace".
@@AlmostLastJedi If you had a dispute over land ownership with your neighbour and called the police, do you really think they would even turn up for a civil matter, let alone get deeply involved?
excellent. I hope you sue network Rail and BTP. Make them pay.
Thanks very much for commenting 👍
I'm sure the homeowners will and what's more they shall probably win, however the wrongdoers will not suffer any personal consequences financially or loss of position. In the end taxpayers and rail users will pay for this. The bad publicity is probably the best weapon ordinary people have against these corporatist entities.
I would put chain back up and if they turn up again tell them that they will be charged with trespass and inform the police as its a civil matter they can't cross until it has been resolved in court
@andrewtrip8617 so what you are saying is that it's OK for them to bring big machines onto your land without your permission public right off way is defined as passing through as they would have to ask permission to big equipment onto there land
@@ianflynn2353 I've had a lengthy boundary dispute myself, albeit under English law, plus a Right of Way issue, but rights of access are slightly different, often contractual and outlined in title deeds, as Covenants.. Right of Way (for the public) is Access and Egress, that is a way in and a way out, has to go somewhere, rather than come in to a garden for example, then leave.
I suggest that you invite Network rail advising of this development and invite them to make an offer of compensation for the aggravated trespass and false claims of ownership of your property which caused you harassment, alarm and distress. You could also ask for their proposals for seeking permission to access your property for any future work that may need to be done. Further ask NR to explain the precise basis on which they accessed the property under the previous owners and the precise basis on which they changed that arrangement.
I suggest that you also write to Plod and invite them to comment on their actions which were based on a total misunderstanding of the legal position of ownership asking them to provide the evidence presented to them that allowed them to make such assertions with threats of arrest which also caused you harassment, alarm and distress.
In both cases you could add that you are giving each party the opportunity to remedy fundamental breaches of your property rights and that any further action you take will be determined by their response.
✓✓✓✓ do this.. exactly
Great comment, thank you 🙂
Not to mention reinstating the parts of the property where they have built a path back to how it was, and replacing any trees that were on your land and removed
@@ALTNABREAC As a lawyer, not an internet trained lawyer, albeit not licensed in your country but in Australia may I offer a suggestion? Before listening to internet commentators: Call a lawyer. Do not offer them a cut, that's what they'll want if they're corporate focused.
@@bashkillszombies "better call Saul"
This reminds me of the Post Office , big company trying to “ railroad “ the small man with unlimited public taxpayers money.
What people may not know is that this sort of corruption, threats, etc, is endemic across police, civil service, agencies, etc. They know they will get away with it, and even when they are losing, they will create an 'offence' just to ruin you life. The judiciary are not interested as they are required to keep their successful conviction rates as high as possible, other wise their careers are sidelined.
And still haven't paid the post office workers the Money owed .
So pleased to hear you’re making progress again the big corps who have pulled the wool of so many people’s eyes in the past! 👏🏻🤘🏻
This is good news, best of luck with all your endeavours.
I live in So Cal and when I got the survey done on my property I made a request to have a concrete monument, not a wooden stake because the crazy neighbor would have taken it out. She wanted 10 feet of my property, took me 1 year to finally get her off.
As a former BR/RT/NR employee we always argued against selling stations and the surrounding areas.
They were sold of by RT a costly mistake you shpuld never sell railway infrastructure and access to anyone.
As I understand it NR can apply for a CPO and reclaim the property at current market rates. I am really hoping some at NR does this and send these two scroungers packing.
It was sold. Its privately owned. Bought in good faith.
Why arent the local elected officials acting on this. Its authoritarian madness.
@@pjmccrackenhow do you keep your breath fresh after eating so much NR arse?
@@pjmccracken You're Mum was obviously a great weight lifter to have raised such a dumbbell Phil. 🏳🌈
Yip, we can all see you have had a cushie job for many years from us tax payers, I can also guess you had shares in RT .
I have accidently come across this channel. I am no expert, but a fan of disused stations as my Uncle owns old station buildings in Scotland. Anyway, I happened to just glance at old maps of your area..... OS six inch 1888-1915, OS 1:25000 , 1937-1961, OS 1:25000 (Outline) 1945 - 65, OS 1:1 million - 1: 10k 1900's etc etc and they all back you up with the boundary you state. Unless they have been wrong since 1888, then it looks like Network rail are trying to pull a fast one. Good luck in your quest and at the end, I hope you win a substantial sum for the stress.
Thank you for your comment and support. It is greatly appreciated. Liz and Ian.
Thanks for your comment, appreciated
I had a dispute with neighbours and had to get a surveyor in.
Our surveyor drove a rebar painted blue like 600mm deep, flush with the ground.
I was told to put in my own pegs at a distance to triangulate the surveyor peg in case it was removed.
I 2 of inserted my own pegs about 3 meters away. It was good enough to find the surveyor peg again.
I can tell you that I needed this when I discovered that someone removed the blue pegs on one side of my property.
Good move getting the boundary confirmed professionally because it should be accepted as a professional survey document qualifying your property boundary.
Thanks Jon!
I hope you get compensation for all the time and trouble Network Rail,have put you both through Ian. All the best from Queensland,Australia.
Hey, thanks for the kind words, very much appreciated.
Hopefully you can sue and cherry on cake is these horrible people will be online forever
It took us 4 years to resolve a land registry error, took it's toll on us but that was in England, fight em if you're right.
The big problem is that the Railway Company's sold off so much land, but they didn't think it though. It's happened up and down the country . Sorry I can't send any money as I am a pensioner and you know what the Government have done to us. Good luck with your fight. Willy.
Hi Willy, just by you commenting on this video supports us, and we very much appreciate it. You have a lovely weekend and thanks so much for watching. BTW We are against what the government have done to you, are you managing to stay warm and have food though?
Dear sir and madam, i am of the same opinion as Willy and pretty much in the same boat. The blatant chicanery and skulduggery of some people involved in maintaining that you don’t own the track is clear to any “reasonable person” (as described by Lord Diplock in the case of DPP v Camplin). Do they honestly believe that they can ride roughshod over what is your boundary or curtilage of your property and has been defined by the qualified surveyor, do they even know of the expression “due diligence” .
If they continue to harass you with their egregious and clearly erroneous claims then they need to be taken to the highest court in the land, it’s a matter of principle and also that right will and must be done , as in the case of the Winslow Boy. All the best to both of you.
Willy....I am a wealthy pensioner and I consider it a prudent move by Kier Starmer to stop giving free money to people like me. If you really are poor then you will still get your free winter money.
correct me if I'm wrong but Network Rail aren't claiming they own the land are they? Instead they are claiming they have right of access over the land.
That's a very important distinction.
@@panman1964 No, they are claiming to own our driveway. They clearly say this in the other videos.
Sorry if someone has mentioned this already. Registered titles mark general boundaries, not the actual boundary. Best to check the actual property title. If you dont have this it will be with your morgage company and you can purchase a copy off them. It is known as 'paper title', this still needs applying to site features. So, NR might own that land or have rights of access and a conveyancing mistake shows otherwise. Or the oppostie. The professionals involved should have picked this up.
Also the title deeds not only show ownership but any other caveats like the rights of others to “pass and repass” over land to reach other owners land - which is very common on tracks and roads leading to somewhere where you have to travel over adjacent land owners land to reach your destination.
As the ownership of the land is in dispute I cannot see how the pursuit by either party will resolve the issue. This requires a determination by the Court, pure and simple. Boundary disputes are one of the most difficult areas as far too often the Land Registry Title relies on vague definitions, often by a red line around the property, which at scale is over 1m wide. In our digital age and with the technology available it should be incumbent on a party selling the land to provide accurate location information by fine detail map references that are then checked and confirmed by neighbouring property owners. At present the Land Registry, far from defining the true ownership of land as it is supposed to do, still leaves it to property owners to fight it out, each probably citing the LR vague mapping as definitive.
Look at the title plan. The white strip which SR claim and is not disputed is only about 2.7m [9'] wide - about the same width as the house-extension with the door. In the films of the cattle-grid and driveway/house the gap from the edge of that extension to the white strip is about 5.5m [18']. Note that all dimensions are estimated on the visual evidence and proportions in plan. it seems to me that about 3m [10'] of the driveway [gray] up past the shed is inside the title boundary. However a strip of the drive-way [which is the white strip], that is SR's, initially takes up a bit under half of the driveway's width along the trees/bushes [approximating to the worn 'rut' in the gravel along the grass-verge/tree line, and then bends slightly away from the house, widening to around 3/3.3m [10/11'] at the station end. In fact the line demarcating the boundary is approximately in line with the lamppost by the platform and a line of plant-pots on the drive. So, the SR's strip [white] is a narrow pathway along the edge of the house's supposed driveway, while the house's owned driveway is a somewhat wider strip, widening after the shed. That is to say that two owners in dispute have a limited width of access past the shed, but of course the house owner could sacrifice same of the grassed area by the shed for a wider drive wholly within there cartilage. SR could widen their [white] access into the tree/bushes. It's suitable for pedestrians etc, but probably too narrow to get anything but domestic sized vehicles down it as it stands. I am surprised that there wasn't a legal agreement tied up with the land sales allowing some access over at least some of the house's driveway up to the station. The path built by SR perpendicular to the drive-way seems to fall entirely within their land. The matter of the cattle-grid and side gate is weird the splayed boundary lines offer both land owners restricted with access - about 1.7m for the house and 2m for SR, with both owners needing access over the cattle-grid which is owned in the main by the forestry company who also control the access round up to it - which incidentally is drawn about the same with as the hose's drive including the SR white strip. The splayed boundary is not reflected by what's on site and needs clarification, currently as built [by whom?] it provides about 60:40% of its width for SR:house. Surely there must be some existing legal agreements in place between all three parties, allowing 'shared' access through this pinch-point otherwise it's unsatisfactory for the house/SR. The householder could erect a gate over their 40% of the cattle-grid, thwarting SR's reasonable width access, conversely SR could block their side with a gate, but that might be petty with neither side winning. oddly the side gate to the cattle-grid is built entirely on the forestry company's land, as is the access path to the side of the driveways to circumvent the grid - as is clear from following the splayed boundary line across this plan area and in photographs. The new path SR built seems to just miss this boundary oddity, but might infringe slightly nearest the grid/gate. So SR do NOT own the house's drive, but SR probably own a strip of it by the trees. Without agreements it would be unsuitable for heavy vehicle access. The cattle-grid access rights need to be agreed by 3 parties as currently it suits no one. I hope this 'second-opinion' helps you all get a resolution that's mutually satisfactory. SR have been very heavy-handed, but the householder obstructing their access across the cattle-grid was wrong, even if the share of its width is narrow they could move small plant and machinery over it. SR should not have claimed to own the whole drive-way, although they might have some agreed rights of access that have not been presented, but failure to do so by them is unsatisfactory. The BTP can get involved in trespass issues, but they offered no real proof to the householder as to why they believed SR over them. Both SR and the householder are wrong to some extent. Surely SR must have something that they can provide to the householder regarding extended access rights along this edge of the drive - SR certainly don't own the whole driveway, the plan is clear on that.
Sounds like the kind of wrap up a good judge would deliver. Good job sir.
Well done for standing up to Network rail and the smug creeps who work for them and the police hierarchy who obviously are in co with them, sue the lot of them! There a disgrace and you are heroes!
Ahhh good stuff, you took my advice getting a cadastral surveyor to peg your boundaries. He should provide a plan as well of that pegging. You can use that in court .
The Torrens system is a wonderful thing.
Hello from Manitoba, Canada.
I hope it works out in your favour, thank you for not giving in.
Wow Network Rail are really showing there True colors with the bully boys. Mr Smith won't be so when court decide the land belongs too you.
I'm following this with great interest unfortunately I'm not in the position to help fund your fight.
Hope the outcome goes well
Thanks for your support in comments, it is very much appreciated. Thank you.
Good Luck Ian, I am rooting for you and your Wife. Richard.....Cape Town South Africa.
Good luck. Watching with interest.
Thanks, we will update when we can. All the best
It would not surprise me if NR when they loose the case, come and cut down all the trees next to your driveway and put a driveway next to yours.
Well thery should of done that in the first place, but they didn't, they have bullied and harassed this couple because.
A. They think they own "access", but they don't.
B. See A because it's easier
Fantastic result. Network rail will still try it on. Good luck 👍
Thanks 👍
Hello from down under ,( Australia) the UK and Australian laws are basically the same , so my advice to you is to find a local justice of the piece and get him as a witness to their actions and show him your documentation and survey reports because a mjudge in court will very very rarely dispute a JPs statment of word being the judge doesn't want to get up in the small hours of the morning or on weekends to hear remand or warrent hearings its the JP the police wake up so the JPs work is almost sacrosanct
I'm really interested to see how this progresses, because their solicitors and upper management drafting in workers and police while ignoring a legal challenge to land is just disgusting. Its so clear what they are doing, clear as day.
I think i would be following on the fence from the cattle grid on the east side and down the track establishing exactly what is mine and on my land. Then cut out an access public footpath for the access.
The paper title would generally show if there is an access allowed to a third party - in this case network rail. If not, then that’s on them to provided adequate compensation for actual right of access, not an imagined or implied one. Now remember, it’s BR or NR that sold the property in the first place, and if they failed to make it clear that they would maintain an access post sale, then tough luck on them. They know you can basically charge commercial rates on land theyd like access over (it’s called a ransom strip for a reason) and my guess is that the deed doesn’t allow for access and they know it. So in steamrollering you, then they hope you’ll run out of cash to fight them.
Well done. Persistence and courage win the day. Sue the arse off them...
Thanks very much 🙂
Shame on network rail and the bully boys at btp, karma
Indeed, thank you 👍
( BTP ) DONT GO ON YOUR OPINION GO BY THE LAW... ( BTP ) ENFORCE THE LAW NOT BE A LAP-DOG TO CORPORATE CORRUPTION ...( BTP ) BOW YOUR HEADS IN TOTAL SHAME & YOU WONDER WHY ?
Thank you 👍
Sounds like either NWR own the lane and you have an easement or you own it, and they have an easement. Either way they would have access. Can’t see possible adverse possession (ie exclusivity) so only leaves incorrectly recorded on the land registry - so a court matter
Network rail are in the wrong as is shown by this couples survey plane and simple they are being bullies and its network rail who have fu@ked up
I believe the station building was first sold in the 1960's and the station area 'carved out' as an island within the wider land. How does the 1960's title deed of your house describe the boundaries? Let's hope not, but It's perfectly possible for the land to have been incorrectly registered, and comparing GPS co-ordinates with a land registry plan would unfortunately be immaterial if the land wasn't registered correctly in the first place.
My understanding is that any surveying needs to be relative to a point of reference which exists on the title deed, and the surveying should be aiming to clarify things relative to the title deed, not the land registry plan.
Thanks for the update. Call me cynical, but at around 16:10 on this video, it shows the surveyor plotting the Eastern boundary, neatly past the end (or beginning) of the new NR footpath. It's almost as if they knew exactly where the boundary actually was! ;)
NR have known all along we own our own driveway. They tried to steal our land and hoped we couldn't afford a surveyor and wouldn't go to court but thanks to our supporters helping us, we got a surveyor!
Have a look at the ground under the peg by the cattle grid in the video. They buried a cable there and they have definitely caused damage to part of our registered title. 👍
They probably do know who owns the land, but have a registered right of access. I unfortunately have a number of rights of ways and easements giving various companies the right to do work on my land. The power company have an underground cable which gives them right of access at any time and I can not cover it in any way, ie pave over it, store anything on top of it. From my understanding they own the "driveway" up to the cattle grid and have some kind of Easement or Right of Way in order to carry out the work on that footpath.
@@thedogsdiddies8421
If that were the case, NR would have produced evidence of easement (or whatever they're called in Scots law) and resolved the dispute ages ago.
Not necessarily, it costs money to do these things and most people won't fight it. In my experience its best to work with them unless you are absolutely loaded and have money to fight them, but make sure you understand the law and things like rights of way, easements, etc
Will be following you both until the truth prevails
Please keep us posted on any new developments
Will do, thank you for commenting! Liz and Ian.
I've been where you are. When you are fighting a bully the only solution is the courts. ££££££. These bullies know this and that's why they are pushing.
Well done to both of you for sticking with it. Maybe you should claim, once it has all be sorted, for the distress and fees THEY have MADE you go through!!!!! Maybe you should claim against both NWR and BTP :)
Keep it up. you're going about this the right way.
Thank you 👍
Thank you for keeping us updated ❤
Thank you for your support and encouragement ❤
Excellent, that is one step completed. No doubt NR would like to engage their own surveyor, but can’t see type result being any different. The next step maybe a court to decide on access rights of NR. Anyway thank you for the enlightening update and good luck for the next step.
Yippee - take them for £££££££££'s........ and more !. And then go for the cops who showed zero interest in YOUR side and blindly obeyed the rail Co !
Keep up the good work you will win in the end
Two different Surveyors have shot the boundaries of our property using GPS in the last 3 years and their stakes are a foot apart. We are now measuring in millimeters property lines that were laid out decades and sometimes centuries ago using iron chains or rope. The irritating part in this case is it looks like there is plenty of room right next to the railroad track itself for them to use as a right-of-way.
Hope you get a very good financial settlement.
Thank you 👍
He read out aggravated trespass and by thay definition the guys in yellow and orange are aggravated trespassers.
🎉Congrats! F*ck the bullies and thieves within big Corporations & Gov'ts.🎊
US when a developer wanted to build houses on a tract of land near my parents house, strangely all the land markers moved in the valley to give the developer what they wanted, more property for them less for everyone around them. Strange how survey markers travel to enable development. The survey markers were from the 30's, and did not have geo location markers, it was 1000 ft from x "metal post marked 13 from xxx survey completed in 19xx".
Corporate corruption is real and spreading insidiously all over the world unfortunately. Thanks for your comment, all the best.
Well done, the big corps think they can walk all over the "little man"....they cant, not if we ALL stand up to them...right prevails 👏👏👏👍👍👍👋👋👋
Looking at the map and the cattle grid, there is a pedestrian gate on their side, maybe there is a pedestrian pathway which is overgrown,.
In the U.S. surveyors drive long, steel pegs into below ground level so if there is a dispute, they can be found with a metal detector at a later date.
@@andrewtrip8617 if they drive steel rods they also use a metal detector to make sure they are not hitting power, cable or water lines. BLUF: It’s incredibly hard for someone to remove a 3 foot steel rod from the ground that marks your land boundaries.
In the us we use a 18 in steel rod with a cap inserted on top with the surveyors I’d number on it to make it a legal property marker.
I think the key is actually the land to the north-east of your house. Given the title plan is definitive, if NR did own the track then there would not be a small area of lawn next to your house. So the plan needs to be interpreted to include that area, plus an area of lawn near the building that is near the gate. You can then fill in the boundary.
The surveyor really should address the bit with the arrow, since that is the whole cause of the problem. Even if just to say that it once was an area not covered in trees and hence that's why it appears as such on the map.
It's interesting to go back to the 1900's maps and see how the road layout was then. maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/side-by-side/#zoom=19.6&lat=58.38800&lon=-3.70564&layers=6&right=GoogleSatHyb - It's not quite lined up, but again it shows what the original road does go up to the side of the house.
I'm proper happy for you guys to now have evidential proof of your boundary, hopefully the YT comments section solicitors will now wind their necks in and realise they aren't solicitors
Yep, congrats guys! 🙌
Keyboard Lawyers "Trolls"
Thanks for your kind words, they are appreciated 👍
@@andrewtrip8617 It must be really nice being a cynic and never wanting other people to have some success, you must live a really happy life
@@andrewtrip8617 Well technically right of way doesn't apply to private houses and garden in Scotland for one. I also don't think you understand what a cynic is and why you have drawn the conclusion I mistaken realist, fantasist and cynic. I chose that word as from your rhetoric, that is how it appears, for example "Success at what exactly". If you would like to go into the philosophy of that I am happy to oblige. If anyone wants to waste their money which I don't agree they are, but, lets for arguments sake say they are, that is their prerogative not yours or mine. If anyone wants to make content or as you call it entertainment on UA-cam, then again that is their prerogative not yours or mine. Now personally I want people to be happy and be successful in their lives, I don't want people in anyway to have bad or negative things happen to them, now I would argue that your rhetoric is very negative and not positive, you clearly don't want these people to be happy hence your negative responses. What I will ask is why you feel the need to be negative to these people whether you personally believe its a realist position or not as being a realist can be extremely negative and we have enough negativity in the world without adding to it.
Shame on corporate bullys of Network Rail. Clealy they believe that might is right and have little regard for the law.
legal action should be taken........shocking bullying tactics
Oh yes 🙂
Shay checking in from dublin Ireland thank you ❤❤❤❤❤
Hi Shay, thanks for commenting 👍
Love that you now have the Truth and its proof your not some nutters from the wilds, that you have a fully mapped out boundary...Happy days, sit back and smile your legends and stood firmly on your ground and it is your land so lets see what the fools parade will say next! proper job, I shall be raising a dram to you both tonight! one love Ian and Elizabeth
Thanks for all of your support my friend.
Best of fortune with this from Perth.
I hate corporate bullies
Thank you very much for your support. Ian and Liz.
I'm confused as to your claim, please correct me if I've got it wrong, I'm sure that during one of your earlier videos of the NWR workmen starting work as they were taking down a fence and cutting down trees and bushes in the area of the new path you stated in that video that they were taking down your fence and cutting down your trees on your land. I'm sure you videoed areas of land where the new path was going which included a washing line drying area
That video to me suggested that NWR were laying claim vast swages of your land, which got my dander up against NWR but now in this video its about the drive.
Don't get me wrong I am on your side but I'm now unclear as to what injustice I'm supporting you on ?
May I suggest a video of you walking your boundary and showing the whole area at eye level with reference points using buildings and the new path will help to make things more clear to a thicko like me.
Best regards
You’re not a thicko at all. They are ignoring this question on mass scale it seems and have mislead everyone in regards to the wooded area where the path was built. I supported them at first but I’m quite annoyed that they told us they owned that area when it’s clear they did not. The damage they claimed the rail company did to their property was probably a major factor in people supporting, and none of that was even true. They need to explain why they said that, because if it was just a mistake they need to issue a correction, otherwise it’s clear that was all just to draw an emotional response from viewers
Clear nonsense. As if network rail was ever going to sell any property without retaining a right of access to maintain their infrastructure. Clever editing and half information.
Wish you the best outcome
This is excellent, let's see now if the Courts are honest on this occasion and accept the irrefutable Fact that this is indeed your property. Perhaps an FOI request regarding the sinister meeting between BTP and Network Raii and or their legal team in which they came up with the lies about who has ownership of the drive of your property would be prudent
Establish which stakeholders were invited, attended and who should have been consulted who was not - you, for instance. Regard that meeting as an internal corporate NR/BTP meeting which would have been an internal echo chamber for them to agree among themselves they were correct and you were wrong - don’t worry about it. They make the process itself a punishment by the way they act and it is deliberate and bullying.
Great advice, thank you! Thank you for your support. Liz
Costs, politicians and police will still support network rail, there is no doubt about the corruption in this country
You will not get anything from a FOI request between a client and their legal team in terms of what was discussed at a meeting. At best you might get their recommendations .
@@robotsonmars1989 the police are not a client, they are public servants who must remain unbiased and they most certainly were not that in this instance, in fact they appear to be fellow conspirators. Now legal advice for Network Rail from their legal teams is obviously not suitable for an FOI request but discussion between them and the BTP most certainly is... They will obfuscate without a doubt but it's worth exposing the conspirators further if possible
Fantastic news stick to your principals and hold your course well done so happy for your victory.
Thank you 👍
Sue network rail and the police.
Well done guys, unbelievable you’ve both been put through this. I’m not even going to comment on the BTP they should be utterly ashamed of themselves, I hope you both receive a written apology from BTP it’s the minimum you guy deserve, unbelievable smh 🤦🏻♂️
Even if you 100% "own" it.... They can still have use of it under the right "circumstances" and can "pass and repass etc".... Been there, done that and got the T-shirt.
Neighbour thought he was right and we were wrong.... Unfortunately, we were basically right and he was 99% wrong.... As proven by the barrister and ruled on by the judge.
2 years of life wasted.
..... Oh... And it was fruitless to him in the end as he had to sell his house to pay our costs aswell as his own.....
Rail company are claiming to own it, and not right of pass
Great news. Hope fully you can start the process of recovery via courts against NR and BTP. We'll done.
Thanks very much 🙂
I notice the police say it's 'their opinion' that the driveway is owned by British transport. It isn't the police's job to have legal opinion, that is for the courts. Police shouldn't be involved in a land dispute like this until a court has ruled on the matter and that ruling can then be enforced by police if necessary. Who the hell do these police think they are that they can make and enforce judgments based on their own opinion. This is totally a civil matter and police have no business getting involved at all. They are just wasting police resources bullying a party in a legal dispute, it's disgraceful.
100% correct analysis of the situation. BTP 'senior management team' decided we did not own our driveway.... Thank you for your great comment and support!
@LizAltnabreac-u8h You are welcome, stuff like this makes me sick, especially when police are constantly whining that they have no resources yet they can send out cars with multiple officers to intimidate you guys when there is court ruling to be enforced. Absolutely unacceptable.
Terrible that they have to Google "the law" they should know the law and apply it correctly. What is our country coming to 😭😭
A question you should also ask you local council or shire is what yardage have you been rated or land taxed on , and is there any registered easement attached to your property title these may not be shown on the title its self
Great news, hopefully it will get sorted out in court, then sue them.
I went through something similar, my neighbor tried to take my driveway from me…it took three years and many thousands of dollars to resolve. We eventually won in court.
Just looked at the first 4 minutes and am confused already. On the plan it shows a 45 degree angle on the corner of your plot. However the angle between the orange rope and yellow rope is 90 degrees?
The truth always prevails. What cant speak cant lie.
Best of luck to you both!
Indeed, the truth does ALWAYS prevail! Thank you for your support. Liz and Ian.
Wishing you two, all the best ❤ Oh and lovely chickens 🐔.
Thank you, yes Liz loves her Chickens 👍
same sort of thing happened to a couple who brought a disused station the rail company can still access their property for clearways as there is a bridge at one end of their property
I'm not a surveyor, but as I look at the map with the red arrow it appears to me that the point of the arrow is on what you are referring to as your driveway and the tail of the arrow is in your property. So, unless you have an easement where the driveway is, it cannot be considered part of your property, per the survey. I don't know who/what owns the property on which the driveway resides, but, as I said, unless there's a legal easement stating you have access to this driveway you are in a world of hurt, or in other words, you're landlocked, altho' I can't see the rest of your property to see if there is access on any other side, etc. Good luck is all I can say to you.
The whole driveway is within our registered title. We do not need an easement over our own land....I'm not sure what you're looking at but you are wrong.
@@LizAltnabreac-u8h I'm happy I was misinterpreting the map and that the entire driveway in on your land. Land squabbles can be very stressful and I hope this is entirely behind you.
Don’t give them an inch. I hope you stuff it to them in court. Can’t wait for more updates
I've just found this randomly. AND, I'm all for justice, etc but I can't see what Network Rail want to DO on your/the land?? Just pass by to get to the track? Install some equipment? Would it be something permanent, done daily or once in a couple of years? Can't you just allow them access???
Exactly this, they just want to get to the platform (which NR own), do an inspection, fit a bike rack, some comms equipment and a remote control button to request the traisn to stop. Until the platform can be inspected, they can't have stopping trains, so many walkers and cyclists are unable to access huge areas of the land becasue these two twits won't let Network Rail get to the platform to do work for the public good.
NR need to do things lawfully. We have always shown a willingness to try and work with NR and even offered to grant them a temporary access licence a week before these videos. NR ignored our offer and instead chose to falsely claim to own our driveway and used their biased BTP officers to threaten to arrest us for trespass on our own land if we tried to stop NR coming onto OUR LAND. BTP gave the workers the nod to cut our lock to our chain to our driveay! Totally unlawful.
They are claiming to own our property. Would you give them your driveway or land?
@@itsverygreen532 NR need to do it LAWFULLY! If they decide to act honestly and do it the right way, then things may progress. How can you not understand this!
@@Carlos-im3hn For someone who supposedly lives in 'California' you sure seem to know a lot about NR's and Scotrail's plans.....shill me thinks!
This is fantastic news, well done both of you.
As clear as mud. The makers promise to to tell what has happened - all the detail - but, as usual, fail miserably. The 'evidence' produced is not convincing, but then it's not clear what the case is all about. There are no dates, no timescale, no indication of why Network Rail want access etc etc. We are shown 'maps' which prove absolutely nothing. I am amazed at the patience and good nature of the police involved who have to put up with all this. Though I bet they get a laugh out of it - because it is funny! It's a comedy and I am beginning to think this is all an attempt by that great British TV director Mike Leigh to make a new version of his 1976 BBC Play for Today starring Alison Steadman and Roger Sloman as Candice-Marie and Keith Pratt [sic] - dead ringers for this couple. It's called 'Nuts in May'. Enough said.
'Clear as mud'? Did you not watch the video? Network Rail claimed to own the driveway. They don't. The surveyor proved the landowners were correct all along. What more evidence do you need....BTP won't be laughing for long! If you think it's 'funny' that a company is trying to land grab, then there's something seriously wrong with you! I doubt you'd find it 'funny' if were you or a member of your family. Idiot.
@@Rob1970-b9t Maybe my reply was 'unacceptable' - it didn't get posted so I'll try again... Pity Rob1970 didn't read my comments. The surveyor proved nothing, and did little on film except bash in a few boundary posts. The videos are so badly made and edited (edited??) that they are confusing because Candice-Marie (aka Elizabeth); and Keith Pratte (aka Ian) fail to put over basic information such as dates and events (when did this all happened? When were they up in court? what happened about the court hearing?) and fail to provide any significant maps. If they want to prove ownership, they need to show us the relevant land registry/deeds and other relevant documents. Simple 'statements' are not facts. Why don't they simply give Network Rail access - which will in no way affect their 'property' - apart from some possible inconvenience in the short term - and the whole matter can be over in no time? Which would give 'Candice_Marie' and 'Keith' time to get different bees in their bonnets and bother other people. They'd be so bored I guess if this all ended...
@@chrisbazlinton The title of the video confirms that the surveyor proved that the 'driveway is 100% within registered boundary' - 100% means ALL unless you do not understand what 100% means...This proves the driveway NR claim to own cannot be owned by them because 100% of it (i.e. ALL of it), is owned by the landowners. That is the evidence. Seems like you need to learn basic English. Access onto someone else's land requires PERMISSION. NR is trying to do things underhandedly and trying to claim their land instead of seeking their permission to use their land. If you think it's okay for NR to go around claiming people's land as their own then let them come and use your land. Seems like you are just easily confused! The majority of people watching this video aren't confused.
@@Rob1970-b9t You just don't read. Just because the 'title' says that, it means nothing. Neither the surveyor nor these two have proved anything. Basic English? Don't make me laugh again!.. And Network Rail have no reason to use my land - they do in this case and have provided a station for 150 years at the site. Meanwhile, the Applebys are effectively depriving rail passengers of the use of the station…
Btw it appears one of Rob1970s posts has ‘disappeared’ - perhaps he thought better of it.
@@chrisbazlinton I do not why my post has disappeared - I did not remove it. NR is depriving rail passengers the use of the station by dragging things out acting unlawfully. That is the bottom line. Go whine to them.
In Australia survey pegs must be driven in to the ground leaving only 3 inches above ground with the top marked in red and a cross cut in the top this becomes a legal documented boundry point beyond reproach
Stay strong.
I'm Australian. I had the pleasure of meeting people from Registers of Scotland at a conference of land registration authorities quite a few years ago. My recollection is that the land title registration system in Scotland is very sound, well regulated, and transparent. I'm quite surprised that the police and rail people you are dealing with seem to have no interest in the text of your title and the referenced cadastral information.
Regarding your current court case, it appears that the police and rail people are challenging the Registers of Scotland (ROS), and as such ROS should be joined in the court action. I hope you are able to establish that point with the court and with ROS.
I do hope this is resolved quickly now that you are at court. All the best to you, and may you prevail.
Thanks for your comment 🙂
@@Nigel-f8w yes I am familiar with title plans and mapping. I have worked in the office of the Registrar General and Surveyor General of South Australia. I have worked in the field with surveyors, and I've prepared survey drawings of land surveys that I assisted with. Where I live the Certificate of Title is the primary source of land ownership. It references a Deposited Plan in the Surveyor General's repository. The Government guarantees title based on those two documents.
My understanding, having spent time with people from RoS, is that the system in Scotland is very similar.
I haven't seen the plan. I'm confident the Surveyor who pegged the boundaries recently has accessed the property data.
Can you please explain what your point is?
@@Nigel-f8w unless the cadastral map is referenced by the land title it has no legal standing as a definition of property ownership. Cadastral maps are descriptive rather than definitive. The property titles, and the survey plans they reference, are definitive. That's their purpose - to unambiguously define each property along with any and all interests in that defined property.
All interests, whether they are liens, mortgages, rights of way, encumbrances, etc are declared on the title (including the referenced survey plan). If not, they do not affect the propriety of the parcel of land.
All of this should be considered in the court case. There's no point arguing on social media about cadastral maps and the like. My point stands - that this case should enjoin the ROS, the authority entrusted by the government to define the Interests in land property.
Did you verify the 4 other limits ? Is the SouthWest limit matching your expectation ?
Did you cross check with the result of the land surveyor with the size and area of your land ?
there seems to be an underlying story not being told here. something isn't right.
Yes, it's not right NR is trying to claim land we own. It's a land dispute.
Good show.
Quick, whack up a boundary fence and a gate! Great work hopefully ease some stress. 👍
Yes definitely, thanks 👍
Now you need to put in a security fence along all you boundaries and keep a record of your property on hand for future reference. As everything on the other side of that boundary the rail company are responsible for. Simple solution to all the problems.
In this video you show the boundary of your land pertaining to the cattle grid and driveway, the orange line shows the limit down the cattle grid, and the yellow line across the cattle grid. Your padlock and chain extended beyond your legal boundary, as noted by the yellow line, so you are trespassing on land that is not yours, as you say in this video it belongs to some forestry commission, who also own the rest of the driveway beyond your orange line.
Scottish rail may have trespassed on to your land, but the lock isn’t on your land. So it’s the forestry people that need to get involved at this point, as according to your boundary the land is owned by them.
I agree totally that Scottish rail then proceeds to trespass on to your land in order to carry out their necessary works, but don’t keep harping on about the lock and chain, as it’s actually not within your boundary. They could have sort the forestry commission’s permission to cut the lock and you wouldn’t have a leg to stand on as it’s not yours, self admission shows this in your boundary markers
I wouldn't be surprised if NR try to buy the piece of land from the Forestry Commission.
Look forward to seeing the next step
Thanks Mark 🙂
Glad to see you are still standing firm against the bullying of NR and the BTP’s corrupt and biased support of NR in their attempt to steal your land.
I truly hope they learn a valuable lesson about trying to use their size to pressure landowners into surrendering their rights and that they are forced to publicly admit their guilt as well as compensate you both for the hell they have put you through.
Morning, yes we hope lessons can be learned from this. We often talk about this old man that used to run a barbers that had been in his family for ever. Well the big corporations bought the whole street to bulldoze them all down, the old man didn't want to move, they flattened everything around his little shop, he stood his ground, he wouldn't move. Appreciate your comment, thank you 👍
so they grew a hedge on their boundary and because the map says the hedge is/was further back they claimed your land? how much can you sue for trespass and intimidation and costs including the surveyor which they should have done? (And damage to property)
you can see Network Rails error and it was on there maps all along there access is where those trees have all grown that bit of grey track is right next to your land - they have made a major massive error and stress and hassle and abuse you have got from Network Rail and BTP is unreal when someone realises this they are going to be swearing under their breaths somewhat !
And this is absolutely correct, I worked on the railway for many years including pre privatisation, the first thing that went was maintenance of the track sides and vegetation control, all those trees that have grown are seeded not planted, that is their track, if you want to call it that! It's plain as day and maps, title plans etc and yet they are blind to it, there must be some old photos somewhere that rail enthusiasts have taken which will show that area of land before the wild growth of plant life took over. Network rail are like ground water, they will take the path of least resistance, first they thought they could just by-pass you and secondly instead of clearing all that area in the other side of your boundary and creating a straight path( which of course would cost money getting all the trees out) they just chose to cut a little segway and lay a path over the top of clear land. Quite ironic in a way because when the railways where first designed they followed the path of least resistance by following contours of the land to save of digging, hence why we have bendy railways.
Glad you can see that, you said it how it is, 'Major massive error' 😂👍
I'm not clued up on this stuff but get solicitors involved, take this as an opportunity to make money, you own part of the land and must pay you to use that land
Take the Evidence and get and go for a restraining order against them both BTP and network rail
With the marker pegs laid out by the survivor, marking out your property line.
This is where you should be putting up a fence all the way around your property and gate with a bolt-cutter proof lock.
❤ the ball has started rolling now, well done best of luck and big love from liverpool ✊️
👏
Checkout the Ordinance Survey map dated nearest to the construction and 1st registered title containing your property and boundary : )
The cattle grid suggests permanent access to the track.