Should any rights of access be clearly contaianed in the property schedule as here in England and if it is not on the schedule/property deeds, does it therefore not exist??
Guys. Not going to lie. Im on your side. But calm down. Stop talking over each other and stop talking over the police officers. Its SO painful to watch..
1 way convos neva works, n they say they would listen, but dont let the btp talk, jus stupid n u said u hav not even taken legal advice !! u moan at the btp & network rail, but u dont get legal advice, jus stupid
@djrkzr Nuetral? You're clearly an idiot if you think that BTP are acting neutrally here. The couple are only acting criminally if the land is not theirs. The BT police are acting purely upon the basis that network rail own the land. No sherrif has decided that the land belongs to Network rail and the BT police don't care about that fact and are solely acting under their superiors instruction that the land does not belong to the couple, but to Network rail, contrary to the couples claim that it belongs to them and is registered as such on the register of Scotland. BTP are totally ignoring the couples claim to the land. How is that neutral?To further prove the point even more, that BTP are not acting neutrally here, notice how they tell the couple that they will have to instead report their claim of Network rail fraudulently stealing their land, to Police Scotland as it is nothing to do with them! They only represent Network rail interests here and not the couples interests. If you can't see the bias here then I'm afraid there is no reasoning with you.
This isn't going anywhere. You may have a case but you are now starting to play to the camera which in my opinion is now starting to work against you. You are not letting the police speak without shouting over them. I personally think the police are doing their best in dealing with you two and are obviously being told what to do by their seniors. Rational discussion from both sides without interuptions is whats needed now. The more you argue and shout is no longer helping your case.
I tend to agree about conduct BUT the Police should not even be involved with this civil matter. When will they grow a pair and tell Network Rail to do one.
Listening to the police is a waste of time other than for our entertainment, but given that it will probably help the viewers, they should try to let the BTP dig their own hole deeper. Unfortunately it is an emotional situation when a corporation tries to steal your land with the help of its own bullying police force, acting not impartially as they should, but as if Network rail actually own the land, and without taking into account, the couples claim they they actually own the land in accordance with their title deeds and land registry maps.
@MickG-q7z That's ridiculous. We the people fund the non-BTP. You think they give a crap if you pay income tax or not? So the unemployed get no protection from the police?
Why don't the people go to a solicitor and check land registry and get a case against them. I don't understand where their boundaries are. The police don't do this when people squat in your own house. You need ,you have to go to court.
So from what I understand. NR want to put a path beside their access road for health and safety purposes. From what I have seen, you own the land NR want to use for the path. If there is no emergency and they been using the road for years, then there is no reason to not go through the courts civil. The police do not have any qualifications to answer, apart from keep the peace. I might not be a lawyer, but surely it needs a legal representative from both sides to either agree, or put in front of a judge to agree. I understand right to access for NR to maintain the line, but if there is no emergency and a land dispute, then work stops until the agreement is reached. I am not a lawyer, but surely anyone can workout that it needs to go to a judge to decide.
Yeah they need a court order ruling on the dispute only then can the police be involved in maintaining the peace as Network Rail ( if they won the court order in their favour carry out their works ) . The police are not the messenger boys or enforcers of NR's opinion.
Much as I really dislike overreach by so called 'authorities' , the couple here are beginning to sound a little bit unhinged. Ownership of a plot of land does not automatically confer complete and absolute rights over it, particularly where there may be established access or rights of way by third parties. Unfortunately as you say they will need to bring their case to a court or appropriate tribunal to issue a definite ruling on the case. That will cost them money, maybe more than they can afford. As usual the real winners will be the lawyers, and the losers will be the couple.
@@fraser7744 so do you think that is ok ? they have to pay so so much money out to protect themselves , only for the old school network to win again , corruption , abuse of the law , abuse of the police constables , bias actions by the senior police ? I do NOT think this is ok . Like i do NOT think it is ok to early release prisoners to make room for Political prisoners , we all kno it is starmer ho ordered the heavy sentence of these people . Starmer gives the orders to the police , who are supposed to be independent of politics , like the police are NOT laywers and can NOT and is NOT allowed to get involved ith civil matters . This is NOT ho our system is supposed to work .corruption , clear to see
@@fraser7744very true, but did you not here the couple clarify that this is not an access issue. It is an ownership issue. The couple have previously stated that they allow access to everybody. What they didn't permit was Network rail digging up their land without first consulting and agreeing with them that it was OK to do so!. Access rights do not give you rights to dig it up, modify it or suddenly now claim it as your land!
@@laurenceanderson2887 I wrote a detailed response to this but because an advert kicked in it was wiped. In short: check out a summary of the recent court case about this matter at Wick Sheriff Court. Seemingly the couple did manage to annoy the sheriff somewhat.
That policeman is spot on. If you listen to what he said, if you make a complaint. Everything that has been said and the advice he has been given will need to be investigated.
Are you mad? The copper said they were there only to represent network rail being able to carry out the work on the disputed land and that they didn't care about the couples counter claim. They are supposed to be impartial, not biased! In fact they stated on camera that the couple would have to instead report their claim that Network rail was fraudulently stealing their land, to Police Scotland, not BTP! I believe that the copper had some difficulty in executing his superiors instructions here because he knows the couple actually own the land, but despite that he is still going to keep his job by doing what ever he is told by his superiors, regardless of who actually owns the land and regardless of how criminal his own actions are!
Lots of patience for stealing some 1s land.Only a court can decide not a legal team from the police. As net work rail r paying the police as a corporation. That's y they r police officers and not cuntstables
The BTP did not listen last time they abused their powers and were told it was a civil dispute and nothing to do with them and they DID NOT listen once again after being told repeatedly they were abusing their police powers and acting unlawfully. What happened is that they refused to listen because their 'senior management' and Network Rail bosses had told them to get access for Network Rail no matter what. Those officers had no intention of listening because they had already been given their orders. Corrupt to the core.
@@Loveofthetruth-m4wwhat's your actual point? It's a bit ranty. Were the couple arrested? Did Network Rail get access? Were the couple intimidated? Or course they weren't.
If this couple is relying on a print-out from Google Maps to determine their property boundaries they're screwed. The policeman is 100% correct that it's inaccurate, especially the further north you go.
If the land is yours then they have no access unless you agree to it. Never ever speak to the police. I was a policeman for 30 years and definitely don't talk to them. Its only criminal if they can prove its a highway and its not its private land.
The problem here seems to be that BTP is acting on the unfounded basis that the couple doesn't own the land, but that Networkrail does. If it is true that Networkrail does own the land, then the couple are acting unlawfully by obstructing network rail from accessing and carrying out work on network rails land. That is the so called justification of BTP to get involved. It also happens to be a great coercive mechanism to enable Networkrail to steal the couples land if it does in fact belong to the couple, by them simply and fraudulently claiming that network rail owns the land and instructing their own police force force to illegally back them up in that false claim! Normally what would happen in a land ownership dispute, is that one of the disputing parties, does not have their own police force to bully the opposition. Instead, Police Scotland would turn up and say this a civil dispute... we can't get involved. It is only because it is Networkrail that is one of the disputing parties, and the fact that they also have the BTP in its back pocket, that they are able to circumvent having to go to civil court, like normal reasonable people do, to legally claim the land as theirs, that they are able to instead deploy their own police force to intimidate and coerce the couple into letting the contractors rip up their land/driveway as well as them ultimately giving up their land.
You're 100 percent correct, they both appear to be quite odious individuals, they need to get professional representation because they are incapable of engaging in diplomatic dialogue at any level.
@@LAMF24 Exactly. It it a civil matter, not a criminal matter. And, for the other people on this thread... Don't watch it if you don't like it, go and do a bit of trainspotting or whatever fascinating thing it is you do when you are not being dicks online.✌️
@@LAMF24 You have any proof of that? It's kinda BTP business to look after NR land. The couple even said as much. We need legal proof as to who owns the land before we can say who's business it is being there. I don't take UA-cam channels as legal proof, sorry.
There’re we are , it took a number of long videos before you got to the important bit, Did You Take Legal Advice , no we didn’t . In a situation like this the logical thing to do is to get legal advice not pull out a GoPro and start shouting at the police who are themselves acting on ….legal advice .
We don't need legal advice to know it is not the job of BTP's 'Senior Command Team' to decide who owns land in a land dispute....The civil law is for disputes.
You guys just fire stuff at them constantly and give them barely any chance to speak. You just want to scream your opinion and you cant handle anyone elses. How are you two adults speaking like this
@MickG-q7z If they aren't impartial, just arrest them and let NR onto the disputed land and be done with it? You sound kinda biased yourself. Where are your undisputed facts? A UA-cam channel? 😂
6:00 Satellite imagery only has a degree of inaccuracy in regards the resolution. It does not have a degree of error. It shows what it shows. In any case, it's not a satellite image, it's an aerial photo. But the same thing applies. The fudge factor is a matter of centimetres not metres.
It depends, parallax causes pretty large errors. Ie, a house between its base and its roof ridge can deviate in an aerial image by a few metres. You need to know if the aerial images are ortho-rectified and accurate. Further, the base maps may infer a clear boundary along current or historic edges like fences, hedgerows, etc. When surveyed using a modern technique or gps this doesn’t change the inferred boundary line. Ie, I’d suggest 99% of the UKs railway property boundary edges, if surveyed using base station GPS, would be +/- 1metre out along most runs. Does that mean railways own thousands of acres of bits of peoples back gardens, or vice versa? No, obviously not. It means the inferred boundary and the accurately measured one deviate. But the inferred boundary is still the boundary!
@@MrW4ippy Parallax only causes large errors if the camera is close to subject. The further the distance the less the error. Hold a finger close to your nose and and close each eye. Then do it with your finger at arms length. Parallax is different. Aerial photos and even satellite photos will have very little parallax error of objects on the ground.
@@MrW4ippy Land registry maps are inaccurate. But they still do give a sense where the boundaries are. Inferred boundaries can move too, as hedgerows grow and are pruned. A boundary is just an imaginary line. It's position might be marked but that doesn't make it accurate. Nor does it mean anything. Put one foot one foot past this line and it means nothing, not even in terms of trespass. Go a few feet past and things change, but it's not binary. It's all about context. So a truck going a few feet past the line into a private residence's property is very different to a person standing four feet on an empty capark of some business.
Orthorectification is a common practice in aerial image processing to generate undistorted aerial images to be used for projecting onto s flat plane, ie, a map. If I take a photo of a house from 1,000m high and 1,000m to the West, and then again 1,000m to the East, the roof will move by several metres relative to its base. Or two parallel fences 1km apart. One rises 50m in height due to the land rising, the other doesn’t. This will result in non-parallel lines apparent in the serial imagery unless you take photos above the rising line only. You absolutely can’t ignore this effect in most ‘cheap’ (read free) aerial images. If you see a significant portion of the side of any vertical structure, the lateral reliability of said images when overlaid with another dataset is questionable.
I reckon those BTP are stuck between a rock and a hard place in all this. They are coming in with advice( possibly in/correct) from their leaders hearing one side. Then they appear here and hear probable other sides of the arguement... And that 'between' the rock and a hard place should be heard before a sheriff to see who owns that!
Ian stay on subject. By giving the police hassle you arnt endearing your self to them. They do seem like reasonable officers just trying to do what they perceive as their jobs. trying to pull them for not having the correct foot wear on is not required for your case and just make you seem a little obstructive.
It's a crap situation but by god you ALL need to stop interrupting each other, and make points one. At. A. time. And then let the other speak. Otherwise it's just frustrating and gets nobody anywhere.
1:30 absolute nail on the head. Why don’t you upload a video explaining the actual background of what’s going on? Have network rail had an unofficial agreement for years to use the access that now the previous and current owners seem to be causing a fuss about?
Many comments show people do not understand the fundamental differences between BTP and the Police. Whilst I have sympathy for Matt & Scott, because they are being put into a difficult and uncomfortable position which is fraught with conflict. Network Rail are at fault on how this is being handled and are using BTP as bully boys. This is a civil matter and should be dealt with in the Courts, the correct venue for this. Everyone should understand these PCs are in a difficult position. They need to let the PCs speak - Liz keeps speaking over everyone.
The officers are being polite and trying to communicate with you, having a go about having hats on isn’t helping your situation. If there is a boundary issue, then take it too your local planning office or whoever is in charge of boundary disputes. Get it surveyed and confirmed.
Those two policemen should be treated with the respect that they deserve. They are two decent hard working coppers who don’t deserve to be put on public trial by social media.
This is what happens when when people do quick Google searches and think they're lawyers. You're talking rubbish and mumbling, thinking you're learned. Also, the officer said so many times he wasn't going to arrest you, yet you lie in your video title.
I'm not quite understanding the issues here? Especially as the railway and station have been there since 1874 and there must have been access to the station since that time, so why wasn't this brought up in a survey when you brought the property? How do public access the station? How was the station maintained in the past?
@@bbsmumma8630it's not about access...they always provided access...it's about NR claiming that they own the land, not the couple and wanting to dig it up, snd change it, etc.
British Rail. Own the 6' either side of the Track. They could define the safety path by building a pathway adjacent to the limit of the 6'. Then BR could build a Secure 7' Fence. Retired Irish Rail Craftsman 🇮🇪🇪🇺
It’s no wonder these to officers are getting frustrated both the land owners are trying to control the situation at the same time, constantly talking over one another, best way to resolve this is around a table with legally represented people in attendance.
Hi guys if you are right when you bought the property your solicitors would have proved ownership If there is a dispute surely it down to you solicitors to sort this it is there problem thats why we use solicitors they have to make sure of land boundaries and be satisfied that everything is ok on the exchange and final purchase good luck it is difficult to deal with bullying !
Well said. But wait! Why do those coppers take an oath then if it doesn't stand for anything and they can just break it when it suits them or when their superiors tell them to do something that requires them to break it? Clown
@@grahamnimmo4656 thanks for proving my point, the oath they take is only something UA-cam lawyers pursue, its legally irrelevant to the public, any breach of the standards they follow is dealt with by the complaints procedure and the IPCC , like I said this oath nonsense is meaningless Soverign Citizen crap.
malfeasance in public office is an offence that BTP and NR could be dragged through the courts and they could be up for investigation. The Police should not be in attendence once a civil court case that has been actioned. Push for compensation and a big fat apology !
I feel for these two they clearly don't know how to deal with this situation, they make silly pointless comments and questions that make them look silly. Just stick to the absolute points that you can evidence.
Just been on land registry found ur property if u line up the corner of your building with a fixed piont on your screen swithc to satilite viem then back to map shows you are 100% correct, the map does show a access road but outside where you say the propety finishes, just like the map also shows a field as a forested area, the btp an nwr are trying to steal land
The major flaw I see here with regards BTP attending on behalf of network rail who haven't even bothered to send a representative along with BTP is they are acting on ***ADVICE ONLY*** be it from senior officers or solicitors it makes no difference. In situations like this the police are only present to prevent a possible breach of the peace, there's not even an order from the courts so they are very much operating outside their jurisdiction and you'd do well to seek legal advice on making a civil claim against BTP AND NETWORK RAIL as it seems there's all manner of offences being committed here and you have the proof right here. Beggars belief the Police are even attending with no official documents and acting as representatives of network rail which they are not.
To be honest. I think the police officers handled themselves well. I appreciate the landowners perspective and they are probably right that it should be dealt with in court. Don't shoot the messenger
I feel for Matt. He is being told things by his management and given directives. BTP have an interest in the dispute. A good option is to have a full survey done and pegged. It then can not be disputed. It also depends if it is an access easement and what the terms / conditions of the easement is.
Are BTP management judges and juries in all land disputes? Sheriffs in courts must be sat about with their feet up on the table taking orders from BTP management.
Aren't you the numpty who stopped the trains with a gate/fence on the line? Cant take anything you say seriously with action like that. And constantly asking questions and not waiting for an answer. All this just to get coin from NR.🙄
I respect your rights completely. But damn go easy on the coppers! It's not their fault what they are told to do. Matt honestly deserves an award for being so calm with you.
These BTP officers are corrupt to the core. They know exactly what they're doing. Do not be deceived by them. They were sent by their equally corrupt 'Senior Management Team' who were working with the senior corrupt officials of Network Rail to do their bidding. Those BTP officers had no legal authority to be there and were knowingly abusing their police powers. Do not be fooled by their 'polite smiles' - the police are pathological liars.
Rubbish, they are the goons of NR with threat of physical force, if they want an award they should provide legal docs to show NR have access rights and/or own the driveway.
@@reb0118 "they have but the couple don't accept them a valid." , which is precisely what's being said. The couple do NOT accept the claims of Network Rail, as they believe the land belongs to themselves.
You need to get a lawyer. Just because you have a lot of people agreeing with you doesn't mean you're right. And let the cops have their say, that way you know exactly where they stand and how they are justifying their stand.
What a lot of nonsense. The pair of you go around in circles, interrupting will not listen. I think the officers are being quite reasonable. Get a solicitor, lawyer what ever you need.
I would phone Scottish police first if NR cuts your chain, but, this is a civil matter that needs to go to court for QUALIFIED people to make a judgement on your dispute
That woman is so annoying, all the talking over everybody just pointless. These two need a solicitor as they just go round in circles. Nobody seems to have a clue.
@scotchegg9797 they seem to have chained off the access and aren't allowing network rail contractors to use it. Id imagine the railway have used that same access for 100 years!
@@AllyB824 they've chained off to stop plant machinery from accessing what they say is their land. They claim to not deny access if NR recognise it's their land, I think? All very messy. You're possibly correct that NR had always accessed before, but I think they object to NR claiming it's their land which has triggered this response. I think? Don't think many of us know the full story in all honesty.
@scotchegg9797 it all seems a bit bizarre. The ownership of the land maybe does go with the house, but there will still likely be an access for network rail that they can't just block off. I'd be interested to here what the local community think about this although I think i can take a reasonable guess. 🤣
@@AllyB824yes that's because they started digging it up and claiming that they owned it. That's when the couple dug their heels in and restricted plant access. They still welcome foot travellers and previously provided access to everybody including NR. They just don't want NR stealing ownership of their land!
The police have to know under what statute law they are asserting their authority. That simple. So unless they can quote their authority, they are acting unlawfully. I repeat, land and access disputes are a civil matter, unless a court order is issued, the police cannot get involved. The policecare not authorised to assert opinion, or act upon instructions concerning civil matters, so the police saying they are being instructed, then by whom? By admitting he has adjudicate land registry documents, and he has opinions is shameful. Who owns your driveway is a civil dispute. The fact they have been told to enforce an opinionated decision by network rail. WOW, a that is disclosing a massive misconduct.
Time to engage some legal services to back yourselves up, surveys etc…. Don’t invite them onto your property. Too much talk - you’re only stressing yourselves out-they are trained to stay calm, keep quiet - it’s the easiest way not to incriminate yourselves, let BTP talk on camera, make no comment, walk away. Call the real police if someone damages your property. Get CCTV set up on the entrance. If approached by ‘workers’ be very careful, things can get ugly quickly. Just bite your lip, extremely difficult though. Good luck.
Just get an injunction against NR to prevent them harassing you via BTP, and requiring them to prove they own or have rights to use the land they are claiming they own. Also, if they did in fact own it, why is there no signage? And, if they do own it then it would be recorded at the land registry and they would have the deed. The burden of proof is for them.
For the benefit of the BTP officers (who probably will not read this), they behaved professionally, they listened and they were polite. It is unfortunate that despite the fact that they have been told multiple times that there is a civil dispute as to whether NR has any entitlement to enter the land, the bosses of those 2 officers keep sending them out, it just makes 2 good officers look bad. Ultimately, whatever NR and the landowners may think this is nothing more than a standard property boundary dispute of the sort that is dealt with by the courts every day of the week. Maybe NR have a reason why they have not gone to court to deal with it, maybe the backlog in the Scottish courts is that long but my understanding this dispute goes back years. Can anyone confirm whether NR have even filed a law suit to settle this in court?
The BTP officers did not listen because they did not leave when they were told repeatedly that it is a civil land dispute and they had no authority being there. They had no intention of listening because as they said their 'senior management team' had sat around a table and already made the decision Network Rail owned the land. That is not the job of senior managers in the police. It is a Sheriff's job in a civil court. The BTP officers were sent by their masters to get Network Rail onto the land no matter what. Corrupt to the core. They are not two 'good' officers because they acted unlawfully and abused their police powers. They are corrupt officers.
@@LocalmotionSpain BTP will probably never arrest because there appears to be an arguable case that NR have no right of access. That is pretty obvious from the fact that BTP have been out so many times that the officers and landowners are on first name terms and despite the landowners never changing their position and never unblocking access, they have not been arrested for the same actions - having just done some digging from press reports, that last statement is wrong, the landowners appear to have been arrested several months ago but the case was dropped due to lack of evidence - I would guess that would make BTP officers even more wary of arresting again. Also the landowners do not need to take a case to the civil court, by blocking access with a padlocked chain across the driveway they have already legitimately asserted their rights, it is NR who need to change the status quo by going to court. NR legal team will know this, if they haven't done so there will be a reason, some weakness in the case, we do not know what that reason is and it is unlikely NR will ever tell us!
@@Loveofthetruth-m4w Without going through all the video's, are you able to confirm that a civil case has been started in the courts? If so, I don't see why the couple even talk to the police. Seems like a lot of back and forth for a land dispute. I'm guessing NR have a deadline to fix track/station or something and this dispute is causing unacceptable delays now.
Another thought have you searched neighbouring land ownership? As for land relating to a railway...Matt seemed interested in that...the moment that is in dispute. The legal advice to senior BTP, was that independent of network rail solicitors who met with the senior officers? Come to think of it, why do network rail get to meet with them privately? Shouldn't there have been a meeting with all parties?
I realise you may be upset but your manner is provocative. The policeman was extremely professional in all his dealings with you - you need to seek legal advice of a solicitor IMHO
I have so many questions.. 1) What is it your both wanting exactly? It isnt clear to me as a viewer.. in one hand your saying they are not to go on your land, in the other your saying youll work with them :/ 2) its constant from both sides people speaking over each other, questions are not being answered because someone else jumps in and brings up another subject altogether 3) why is it the rail company want access, is it just to maintain the railway? 4) why dont the rail company just drive around the disputed land and do whatever they need to do then?
Police should not be getting involved in a civil land dispute unless someone is making criminal threats or someone has been hurt. This dispute needs to be dealt with by civil court. BTP are putting the corporation before public and are going to be bias in favour of network rail so should not be dealing with this. Once they read you your rights say nothing! That should be the end of your conversation without a lawyer/solicitor present. Stop talking as they will use anything you say against you.
100% and Ian shouldn't have accepted the caution. I can understand Ian's frustration and not realising that a caution goes on record etc. Get a meeting with a Barrister and see if they can take on the case preferably on a win win basis asap
I think it's more likely NR are sick and tired of trying to engage with these, if this is what they call communicating. How many times would you turn up to have to listen to non stop drivel in stereo.
You 2 need to actually listen to them! You keep demanding they listen to you, yet don't offer them the same. They didn't threaten you with arrest, they simply said your arrest was a possible outcome, that's not a threat it's a statement. You need to stop listening to the comment section experts!
You need representation by a lawyer. Surely if they have access, it will be laid out in the covenants of the deeds. If they owned the track, I would have thought the land boundary would come into the property and bound the track to the extent of the rail network, and would be shown as ownership under it's own title. Let a lawyer tell them it is a civil matter, it will hold more weight.
I was interested in this so I looked at the land plan. There is a corridor shown to the east of your property in green which lines up with the track where the police are stood. I may be wrong but it looks like that track is outside your land. Difficult to say, it may be a grassed verge to the east of the track. I'd contact a chartered surveyor to physically measure and stake out the boundary on your deeds plan. Also you have a blue shade on your land plan which runs from the track to the south west through your land to the said green corridor. What is this for in the deeds? Is this possibly the burden right of access for Scotrail and not the gated access?
This policeman is great, he politely tries to tell you what legislation he has been instructed to attend with but you wont let him. You invite him towards the building then you throw him off land you’re not even proven to own when he tries politely again. You’re clearly playing to the camera but shouting the guy down is making you look bad.
I have watched all the videos - I still have no idea what the hell is going on. The transport police have been civil with you throughout especially Matt and Scott. What is the actual dispute - you have never explained that. You are beginning to sound like the Sov Cit people we see from USA-based videos. Please let us know what is the ACTUAL problem you are facing - you have never done that. Presumably it's an access/land ownership thing - we get that, but it is so ambiguous from seeing what you have put out. Stop deliberately trying to bait the police - it's not helping your cause. Rule number one - don't be a dick.
No wonder the locals call them the nutty neighbours! This seems like a great fuss over what should have been a straightforward matter. What harm would it do to let Network Rail have access to the site? I am sure that were they to make a mess of the road during their work, they would make it good. This couple seem to be totally bloody minded for no good reason.
What a couple of tossers. Those coppers showed so much patience they deserve an award. I can’t see any sheriff regarding what Network Rail or BTP are attempting to do as any form of corruption. A little applied common sense would have gone a long way to avoiding the whole situation.
@@jamesrussell7775 imagine you own a house and someone wants to come into your bedroom. You call the police saying someone is in trying to break into your home, the police arrive. Now imagine that despite showing all the documents showing you own the house, deeds, land registry documentation, the police will arrest you if you stop the said person entering your home and bedroom. Now ask yourself what emotional state you'd be in, and how would you view the police allowing this?
@@jamesrussell7775 It doesn't matter how nutty they are. Things should still be done legally by NR. If we don't have the rule of law, we don't have any defence against abuse of power.
“Some people have had a meeting and decided that the land registry is wrong” 😂 These jokers! “The forces opinion” “The forces policy” They have hung him out to dry sending him there with those words.
what is needed is a professional unbiased survey to prove legal boundary rights ,Scotlands land department will define who actually owns land
Caution; they are a department of a corrupt government.
Should any rights of access be clearly contaianed in the property schedule as here in England and if it is not on the schedule/property deeds, does it therefore not exist??
This policeman has so much patience with this couple
A clear example of corporate business control the police.
It bit like Starmageddon the W⚓️
Exactly! These corporations underhandedly own everything, including our government and judiciary.
Agreed!
But this is what happens when a corporate business is allowed its own law enforcement agency.
Yes for sure! The own the cops towns and news or at the very least they are in their pockets.
I feel so sorry for Matt, blokes got so much patience.
Guys. Not going to lie. Im on your side. But calm down. Stop talking over each other and stop talking over the police officers. Its SO painful to watch..
Especially when those btps are trying to be as neutral as they can.
They demand they be listened to yet don't do the same. Very irritating.
1 way convos neva works, n they say they would listen, but dont let the btp talk, jus stupid n u said u hav not even taken legal advice !! u moan at the btp & network rail, but u dont get legal advice, jus stupid
@djrkzr Nuetral? You're clearly an idiot if you think that BTP are acting neutrally here. The couple are only acting criminally if the land is not theirs. The BT police are acting purely upon the basis that network rail own the land. No sherrif has decided that the land belongs to Network rail and the BT police don't care about that fact and are solely acting under their superiors instruction that the land does not belong to the couple, but to Network rail, contrary to the couples claim that it belongs to them and is registered as such on the register of Scotland. BTP are totally ignoring the couples claim to the land. How is that neutral?To further prove the point even more, that BTP are not acting neutrally here, notice how they tell the couple that they will have to instead report their claim of Network rail fraudulently stealing their land, to Police Scotland as it is nothing to do with them! They only represent Network rail interests here and not the couples interests. If you can't see the bias here then I'm afraid there is no reasoning with you.
Easy to say when it's not your land being encroached on with the Police blatantly siding on National Rails. Obvious Bias here.
As soon as he cautioned you ask him what for then shut your mouth . Never invite them onto your property
Like with vampires
A caution is merely that. It's self explanatory.
Tresspass everyone.
This isn't going anywhere. You may have a case but you are now starting to play to the camera which in my opinion is now starting to work against you. You are not letting the police speak without shouting over them. I personally think the police are doing their best in dealing with you two and are obviously being told what to do by their seniors. Rational discussion from both sides without interuptions is whats needed now. The more you argue and shout is no longer helping your case.
The BTP shouldn't even be there. They're being very reasonable by even speaking to the Police
I tend to agree about conduct BUT the Police should not even be involved with this civil matter. When will they grow a pair and tell Network Rail to do one.
Listening to the police is a waste of time other than for our entertainment, but given that it will probably help the viewers, they should try to let the BTP dig their own hole deeper. Unfortunately it is an emotional situation when a corporation tries to steal your land with the help of its own bullying police force, acting not impartially as they should, but as if Network rail actually own the land, and without taking into account, the couples claim they they actually own the land in accordance with their title deeds and land registry maps.
The case is with the sheriff, not with the police. They should not even be there.
@@grahamnimmo4656😮😮
whos paying for the police to carry out this?...they have no right to be there
Train operators, Network Rail and London Underground pay for BTP
You need the civil police to come and take over also a good lawyer
They are from "The Lodge"! They are using pressgang tactics.
@MickG-q7z That's ridiculous. We the people fund the non-BTP. You think they give a crap if you pay income tax or not? So the unemployed get no protection from the police?
Why don't the people go to a solicitor and check land registry and get a case against them. I don't understand where their boundaries are. The police don't do this when people squat in your own house. You need ,you have to go to court.
So from what I understand.
NR want to put a path beside their access road for health and safety purposes.
From what I have seen, you own the land NR want to use for the path.
If there is no emergency and they been using the road for years, then there is no reason to not go through the courts civil.
The police do not have any qualifications to answer, apart from keep the peace.
I might not be a lawyer, but surely it needs a legal representative from both sides to either agree, or put in front of a judge to agree.
I understand right to access for NR to maintain the line, but if there is no emergency and a land dispute, then work stops until the agreement is reached.
I am not a lawyer, but surely anyone can workout that it needs to go to a judge to decide.
That's an excuse and I agree go to court THEN police
Yeah they need a court order ruling on the dispute only then can the police be involved in maintaining the peace as Network Rail ( if they won the court order in their favour carry out their works ) . The police are not the messenger boys or enforcers of NR's opinion.
Much as I really dislike overreach by so called 'authorities' , the couple here are beginning to sound a little bit unhinged. Ownership of a plot of land does not automatically confer complete and absolute rights over it, particularly where there may be established access or rights of way by third parties. Unfortunately as you say they will need to bring their case to a court or appropriate tribunal to issue a definite ruling on the case. That will cost them money, maybe more than they can afford. As usual the real winners will be the lawyers, and the losers will be the couple.
@@fraser7744 so do you think that is ok ? they have to pay so so much money out to protect themselves , only for the old school network to win again , corruption , abuse of the law , abuse of the police constables , bias actions by the senior police ? I do NOT think this is ok . Like i do NOT think it is ok to early release prisoners to make room for Political prisoners , we all kno it is starmer ho ordered the heavy sentence of these people . Starmer gives the orders to the police , who are supposed to be independent of politics , like the police are NOT laywers and can NOT and is NOT allowed to get involved ith civil matters . This is NOT ho our system is supposed to work .corruption , clear to see
@@fraser7744very true, but did you not here the couple clarify that this is not an access issue. It is an ownership issue. The couple have previously stated that they allow access to everybody. What they didn't permit was Network rail digging up their land without first consulting and agreeing with them that it was OK to do so!. Access rights do not give you rights to dig it up, modify it or suddenly now claim it as your land!
Its all very interesting. I actually feel quite sorry for the copper. He is only doing what he's being told to do.
Don't shoot the messenger type thing
The couple is absolutely correct. It's a civil conflict, the railroad doesn't want to chance it in court.
If they keep cutting off and talking over the Sherrif like they are doing here theywould end up losing
@@laurenceanderson2887 I wrote a detailed response to this but because an advert kicked in it was wiped.
In short: check out a summary of the recent court case about this matter at Wick Sheriff Court. Seemingly the couple did manage to annoy the sheriff somewhat.
That policeman is spot on.
If you listen to what he said, if you make a complaint. Everything that has been said and the advice he has been given will need to be investigated.
Are you mad? The copper said they were there only to represent network rail being able to carry out the work on the disputed land and that they didn't care about the couples counter claim. They are supposed to be impartial, not biased! In fact they stated on camera that the couple would have to instead report their claim that Network rail was fraudulently stealing their land, to Police Scotland, not BTP! I believe that the copper had some difficulty in executing his superiors instructions here because he knows the couple actually own the land, but despite that he is still going to keep his job by doing what ever he is told by his superiors, regardless of who actually owns the land and regardless of how criminal his own actions are!
god those policeman have alot of patience
Want medals
Lots of patience for stealing some 1s land.Only a court can decide not a legal team from the police. As net work rail r paying the police as a corporation. That's y they r police officers and not cuntstables
Any chance of letting the officers fully explain without interruption, you keep butting in......
Shut it boot licker!
STOP inviting them on your land. They are only doing their job and I'm sure don't really care. Stop talking to them! Save it for the courts.
@@WeeBurnip-lz3fr Nonsense. They will win the case in court. It's obviously their land and the Network rail want it.
Absolutely. The coppers are only there because they believe they, BTP, have jurisdiction on the land.
Otherwise, the normal sheriff is in charge.
@@Nellyonthelandsince when did a sheriff have jurisdiction over one's land?
@@reb0118 Look up Scottish laws.
@@reb0118 Scottish Law differs with the Sherrifs.
This is a civil matter, not a criminal one.
BTP have NO jurisdiction regarding this matter.
If they block access then is that not some for. Of obstruction that can be deferred to BTP?
Ian, Liz. You have 2 ears and 1 mouth....try listening twice as hard.
The BTP did not listen last time they abused their powers and were told it was a civil dispute and nothing to do with them and they DID NOT listen once again after being told repeatedly they were abusing their police powers and acting unlawfully. What happened is that they refused to listen because their 'senior management' and Network Rail bosses had told them to get access for Network Rail no matter what. Those officers had no intention of listening because they had already been given their orders. Corrupt to the core.
@@Loveofthetruth-m4wwhat's your actual point? It's a bit ranty. Were the couple arrested? Did Network Rail get access? Were the couple intimidated?
Or course they weren't.
If this couple is relying on a print-out from Google Maps to determine their property boundaries they're screwed. The policeman is 100% correct that it's inaccurate, especially the further north you go.
They previously stated that it's part of their title deeds
but the police were using a hand drawn map that was shown to be innacurate
If the land is yours then they have no access unless you agree to it. Never ever speak to the police. I was a policeman for 30 years and definitely don't talk to them. Its only criminal if they can prove its a highway and its not its private land.
So you never talked at work for 30 years !!!!!. Crikey.
The problem here seems to be that BTP is acting on the unfounded basis that the couple doesn't own the land, but that Networkrail does. If it is true that Networkrail does own the land, then the couple are acting unlawfully by obstructing network rail from accessing and carrying out work on network rails land. That is the so called justification of BTP to get involved. It also happens to be a great coercive mechanism to enable Networkrail to steal the couples land if it does in fact belong to the couple, by them simply and fraudulently claiming that network rail owns the land and instructing their own police force force to illegally back them up in that false claim!
Normally what would happen in a land ownership dispute, is that one of the disputing parties, does not have their own police force to bully the opposition. Instead, Police Scotland would turn up and say this a civil dispute... we can't get involved. It is only because it is Networkrail that is one of the disputing parties, and the fact that they also have the BTP in its back pocket, that they are able to circumvent having to go to civil court, like normal reasonable people do, to legally claim the land as theirs, that they are able to instead deploy their own police force to intimidate and coerce the couple into letting the contractors rip up their land/driveway as well as them ultimately giving up their land.
@@petewright7318 😉
you guys are so rude. You are always saying 'Please ;et us finish' but then never giving the coppers a chance to say anything. Learn some manners!
They are entitled to do as they please on their own land. BTP should not be there.
Put yourself in there situation
@@Paul-vtid70 I think you mean ‘their’!
Does it matter smart arse
You're 100 percent correct, they both appear to be quite odious individuals, they need to get professional representation because they are incapable of engaging in diplomatic dialogue at any level.
FFS give the copper a chance to actually speak, you can then go and research their statement and move forward.
BTP have no business being there.
These two are only interested in soap boxing their prepared waffle to make themselves feel smart. They aren't.
Exactly. Becoming tiresome.
@@LAMF24 Exactly. It it a civil matter, not a criminal matter. And, for the other people on this thread... Don't watch it if you don't like it, go and do a bit of trainspotting or whatever fascinating thing it is you do when you are not being dicks online.✌️
@@LAMF24 You have any proof of that? It's kinda BTP business to look after NR land. The couple even said as much. We need legal proof as to who owns the land before we can say who's business it is being there. I don't take UA-cam channels as legal proof, sorry.
There’re we are , it took a number of long videos before you got to the important bit, Did You Take Legal Advice , no we didn’t . In a situation like this the logical thing to do is to get legal advice not pull out a GoPro and start shouting at the police who are themselves acting on ….legal advice .
We don't need legal advice to know it is not the job of BTP's 'Senior Command Team' to decide who owns land in a land dispute....The civil law is for disputes.
A clear example of intimidating they are getting the police to do their dirty work to grind you down it's disgusting keep strong both of you
You guys just fire stuff at them constantly and give them barely any chance to speak. You just want to scream your opinion and you cant handle anyone elses.
How are you two adults speaking like this
Leave your missus indoors and you might get somewhere.
She used to be a detective in the Police so she knows what she is doing I guess 🤷
Well if the police do a thing to arrest . A lawsuit will need to be done .
police MUST be impartial - if the police are not 100% sure who owns the land they must not enforce as if they are (sure)
@MickG-q7z They shouldn't even be there
The police they to be involved in civil matters they only reason they should be there is to uphold the peace
@MickG-q7z If they aren't impartial, just arrest them and let NR onto the disputed land and be done with it? You sound kinda biased yourself. Where are your undisputed facts? A UA-cam channel? 😂
6:00 Satellite imagery only has a degree of inaccuracy in regards the resolution. It does not have a degree of error. It shows what it shows. In any case, it's not a satellite image, it's an aerial photo. But the same thing applies. The fudge factor is a matter of centimetres not metres.
It depends, parallax causes pretty large errors.
Ie, a house between its base and its roof ridge can deviate in an aerial image by a few metres.
You need to know if the aerial images are ortho-rectified and accurate.
Further, the base maps may infer a clear boundary along current or historic edges like fences, hedgerows, etc.
When surveyed using a modern technique or gps this doesn’t change the inferred boundary line.
Ie, I’d suggest 99% of the UKs railway property boundary edges, if surveyed using base station GPS, would be +/- 1metre out along most runs.
Does that mean railways own thousands of acres of bits of peoples back gardens, or vice versa?
No, obviously not. It means the inferred boundary and the accurately measured one deviate.
But the inferred boundary is still the boundary!
@@MrW4ippy Parallax only causes large errors if the camera is close to subject. The further the distance the less the error. Hold a finger close to your nose and and close each eye. Then do it with your finger at arms length. Parallax is different. Aerial photos and even satellite photos will have very little parallax error of objects on the ground.
@@MrW4ippy Land registry maps are inaccurate. But they still do give a sense where the boundaries are. Inferred boundaries can move too, as hedgerows grow and are pruned. A boundary is just an imaginary line. It's position might be marked but that doesn't make it accurate. Nor does it mean anything. Put one foot one foot past this line and it means nothing, not even in terms of trespass. Go a few feet past and things change, but it's not binary. It's all about context. So a truck going a few feet past the line into a private residence's property is very different to a person standing four feet on an empty capark of some business.
Orthorectification is a common practice in aerial image processing to generate undistorted aerial images to be used for projecting onto s flat plane, ie, a map.
If I take a photo of a house from 1,000m high and 1,000m to the West, and then again 1,000m to the East, the roof will move by several metres relative to its base.
Or two parallel fences 1km apart. One rises 50m in height due to the land rising, the other doesn’t.
This will result in non-parallel lines apparent in the serial imagery unless you take photos above the rising line only.
You absolutely can’t ignore this effect in most ‘cheap’ (read free) aerial images.
If you see a significant portion of the side of any vertical structure, the lateral reliability of said images when overlaid with another dataset is questionable.
I reckon those BTP are stuck between a rock and a hard place in all this. They are coming in with advice( possibly in/correct) from their leaders hearing one side. Then they appear here and hear probable other sides of the arguement... And that 'between' the rock and a hard place should be heard before a sheriff to see who owns that!
Ian stay on subject. By giving the police hassle you arnt endearing your self to them. They do seem like reasonable officers just trying to do what they perceive as their jobs. trying to pull them for not having the correct foot wear on is not required for your case and just make you seem a little obstructive.
It's a crap situation but by god you ALL need to stop interrupting each other, and make points one. At. A. time.
And then let the other speak.
Otherwise it's just frustrating and gets nobody anywhere.
Well done BTP 👏🏻
1:30 absolute nail on the head.
Why don’t you upload a video explaining the actual background of what’s going on?
Have network rail had an unofficial agreement for years to use the access that now the previous and current owners seem to be causing a fuss about?
The police officers have the patence of a saint. They were not allowed to get a word in. Unbelievable!
They shouldn't be there in the first place.
Boot licker!
@@LAMF24 Regrettably a lot of people are ignorant to the law and miss the point of law
Many comments show people do not understand the fundamental differences between BTP and the Police.
Whilst I have sympathy for Matt & Scott, because they are being put into a difficult and uncomfortable position which is fraught with conflict.
Network Rail are at fault on how this is being handled and are using BTP as bully boys.
This is a civil matter and should be dealt with in the Courts, the correct venue for this.
Everyone should understand these PCs are in a difficult position. They need to let the PCs speak - Liz keeps speaking over everyone.
The officers are being polite and trying to communicate with you, having a go about having hats on isn’t helping your situation.
If there is a boundary issue, then take it too your local planning office or whoever is in charge of boundary disputes. Get it surveyed and confirmed.
Those two policemen should be treated with the respect that they deserve.
They are two decent hard working coppers who don’t deserve to be put on public trial by social media.
They are fascists and are not 'decent'.
@@vandammesque
Hmmmmmm
last time i checked its fully ok to record in a public place or and private property that you own...get a grip..they are civil servants
This is what happens when when people do quick Google searches and think they're lawyers. You're talking rubbish and mumbling, thinking you're learned. Also, the officer said so many times he wasn't going to arrest you, yet you lie in your video title.
I'm not quite understanding the issues here? Especially as the railway and station have been there since 1874 and there must have been access to the station since that time, so why wasn't this brought up in a survey when you brought the property? How do public access the station? How was the station maintained in the past?
I cant understand this either. There must be an agreement somewhere
@@bbsmumma8630it's not about access...they always provided access...it's about NR claiming that they own the land, not the couple and wanting to dig it up, snd change it, etc.
You guys need to chose one of you to speak otherwise it will confuse the situation in court .
So why are the cops there ? But they do not do need to be there ,as the driveway is not a thing to do with the BTP.
British Rail. Own the 6' either side of the Track. They could define the safety path by building a pathway adjacent to the limit of the 6'. Then BR could build a Secure 7' Fence.
Retired Irish Rail Craftsman
🇮🇪🇪🇺
It's easier to steal somebody's else land
@@antyrak7905 Like the HS2 land grab.
Get the Black Belt Barrister on the case!
We sent him a message and didn't hear back, if loads of people contacted him maybe?
He's a barrister of England and Wales.
It’s no wonder these to officers are getting frustrated both the land owners are trying to control the situation at the same time, constantly talking over one another, best way to resolve this is around a table with legally represented people in attendance.
Hi guys if you are right when you bought the property your solicitors would have proved ownership
If there is a dispute surely it down to you solicitors to sort this it is there problem thats why we use solicitors they have to make sure of land boundaries and be satisfied that everything is ok on the exchange and final purchase good luck it is difficult to deal with bullying !
Anyone starting that " on your oath " crap is full of it and pusuing internet pseudo law .
Well said. But wait! Why do those coppers take an oath then if it doesn't stand for anything and they can just break it when it suits them or when their superiors tell them to do something that requires them to break it? Clown
Yellow ice hope someone tries to steal your land and the police enforce it and see how you take it
@@grahamnimmo4656 thanks for proving my point, the oath they take is only something UA-cam lawyers pursue, its legally irrelevant to the public, any breach of the standards they follow is dealt with by the complaints procedure and the IPCC , like I said this oath nonsense is meaningless Soverign Citizen crap.
Yep, acting like a stupid youtube 'auditor' it's just cringeworthy, especially as she is an ex copper...!
malfeasance in public office is an offence that BTP and NR could be dragged through the courts and they could be up for investigation. The Police should not be in attendence once a civil court case that has been actioned. Push for compensation and a big fat apology !
He comprehends what you are saying! So does the Scot! Stop wasting your breath they are stuck in the middle!
I feel for these two they clearly don't know how to deal with this situation, they make silly pointless comments and questions that make them look silly. Just stick to the absolute points that you can evidence.
Just been on land registry found ur property if u line up the corner of your building with a fixed piont on your screen swithc to satilite viem then back to map shows you are 100% correct, the map does show a access road but outside where you say the propety finishes, just like the map also shows a field as a forested area, the btp an nwr are trying to steal land
The major flaw I see here with regards BTP attending on behalf of network rail who haven't even bothered to send a representative along with BTP is they are acting on ***ADVICE ONLY*** be it from senior officers or solicitors it makes no difference. In situations like this the police are only present to prevent a possible breach of the peace, there's not even an order from the courts so they are very much operating outside their jurisdiction and you'd do well to seek legal advice on making a civil claim against BTP AND NETWORK RAIL as it seems there's all manner of offences being committed here and you have the proof right here. Beggars belief the Police are even attending with no official documents and acting as representatives of network rail which they are not.
To be honest. I think the police officers handled themselves well. I appreciate the landowners perspective and they are probably right that it should be dealt with in court. Don't shoot the messenger
Stop talking and try listening FFS!
It was the police that need to listen...
I feel for Matt. He is being told things by his management and given directives. BTP have an interest in the dispute. A good option is to have a full survey done and pegged. It then can not be disputed. It also depends if it is an access easement and what the terms / conditions of the easement is.
Another example of not letting them answer your questions
Are BTP management judges and juries in all land disputes? Sheriffs in courts must be sat about
with their feet up on the table taking orders from BTP management.
No they are not. But they have received adive from those that are - not that there are juries in land disputes.
Aren't you the numpty who stopped the trains with a gate/fence on the line? Cant take anything you say seriously with action like that. And constantly asking questions and not waiting for an answer.
All this just to get coin from NR.🙄
I respect your rights completely. But damn go easy on the coppers! It's not their fault what they are told to do. Matt honestly deserves an award for being so calm with you.
These BTP officers are corrupt to the core. They know exactly what they're doing. Do not be deceived by them. They were sent by their equally corrupt 'Senior Management Team' who were working with the senior corrupt officials of Network Rail to do their bidding. Those BTP officers had no legal authority to be there and were knowingly abusing their police powers. Do not be fooled by their 'polite smiles' - the police are pathological liars.
Rubbish, they are the goons of NR with threat of physical force, if they want an award they should provide legal docs to show NR have access rights and/or own the driveway.
An award 😅 for harassing them
@@vandammesquethey have but the couple don't accept them as valid.
@@reb0118 "they have but the couple don't accept them a valid." , which is precisely what's being said. The couple do NOT accept the claims of Network Rail, as they believe the land belongs to themselves.
Of course I will let you talk says young thug talking to someone on their own land, well that's big of the thug.
You need to get a lawyer. Just because you have a lot of people agreeing with you doesn't mean you're right. And let the cops have their say, that way you know exactly where they stand and how they are justifying their stand.
What a lot of nonsense. The pair of you go around in circles, interrupting will not listen. I think the officers are being quite reasonable. Get a solicitor, lawyer what ever you need.
she keeps going on let me finish but doesn't let the constables finish and butts in again
I would phone Scottish police first if NR cuts your chain, but, this is a civil matter that needs to go to court for QUALIFIED people to make a judgement on your dispute
This meeting is outrageous!
Didn't realize for a while that these guys were train cops. So, yeah, they were definitely unbiased.
That woman is so annoying, all the talking over everybody just pointless.
These two need a solicitor as they just go round in circles.
Nobody seems to have a clue.
@@WeeBurnip-lz3fr God save us all.
@@WeeBurnip-lz3fr Preferably all of them.
That woman seems to be the only one that is applying any intelligence TBF
@@WeeBurnip-lz3fryeah we can tell
Don't buy a house at a railway station if you don't want people using the access that has been in place for years before.
From what I'm aware of they're happy for people to use the path etc.. the issue surrounds the ownership of the land.
@scotchegg9797 they seem to have chained off the access and aren't allowing network rail contractors to use it. Id imagine the railway have used that same access for 100 years!
@@AllyB824 they've chained off to stop plant machinery from accessing what they say is their land. They claim to not deny access if NR recognise it's their land, I think? All very messy. You're possibly correct that NR had always accessed before, but I think they object to NR claiming it's their land which has triggered this response. I think? Don't think many of us know the full story in all honesty.
@scotchegg9797 it all seems a bit bizarre. The ownership of the land maybe does go with the house, but there will still likely be an access for network rail that they can't just block off.
I'd be interested to here what the local community think about this although I think i can take a reasonable guess. 🤣
@@AllyB824yes that's because they started digging it up and claiming that they owned it. That's when the couple dug their heels in and restricted plant access. They still welcome foot travellers and previously provided access to everybody including NR. They just don't want NR stealing ownership of their land!
They didn't even let him tell them what the offence is that they were potentially going to arrest them. Every time he got to it, they spoke over him.
This reminds me of the Post Office corruption. Network rail should be stripped of their private police force.
Thanks for commenting 👍
The police have to know under what statute law they are asserting their authority. That simple. So unless they can quote their authority, they are acting unlawfully.
I repeat, land and access disputes are a civil matter, unless a court order is issued, the police cannot get involved.
The policecare not authorised to assert opinion, or act upon instructions concerning civil matters, so the police saying they are being instructed, then by whom?
By admitting he has adjudicate land registry documents, and he has opinions is shameful.
Who owns your driveway is a civil dispute. The fact they have been told to enforce an opinionated decision by network rail. WOW, a that is disclosing a massive misconduct.
Time to engage some legal services to back yourselves up, surveys etc…. Don’t invite them onto your property. Too much talk - you’re only stressing yourselves out-they are trained to stay calm, keep quiet - it’s the easiest way not to incriminate yourselves, let BTP talk on camera, make no comment, walk away. Call the real police if someone damages your property. Get CCTV set up on the entrance. If approached by ‘workers’ be very careful, things can get ugly quickly. Just bite your lip, extremely difficult though. Good luck.
Just get an injunction against NR to prevent them harassing you via BTP, and requiring them to prove they own or have rights to use the land they are claiming they own. Also, if they did in fact own it, why is there no signage? And, if they do own it then it would be recorded at the land registry and they would have the deed. The burden of proof is for them.
Injunctions are an English thing.
Reading rights is used as a threat
You have the right to remain silent. Do not talk to them.
Fat f**king chance with this pair.
@@petewright7318Michael was referring to the policemen - in that they have the right not to talk to the couple.
I wouldn't say these two are corrupt as such...sadly the old saying applies here 'just following orders'.
For the benefit of the BTP officers (who probably will not read this), they behaved professionally, they listened and they were polite.
It is unfortunate that despite the fact that they have been told multiple times that there is a civil dispute as to whether NR has any entitlement to enter the land, the bosses of those 2 officers keep sending them out, it just makes 2 good officers look bad.
Ultimately, whatever NR and the landowners may think this is nothing more than a standard property boundary dispute of the sort that is dealt with by the courts every day of the week. Maybe NR have a reason why they have not gone to court to deal with it, maybe the backlog in the Scottish courts is that long but my understanding this dispute goes back years.
Can anyone confirm whether NR have even filed a law suit to settle this in court?
The BTP officers did not listen because they did not leave when they were told repeatedly that it is a civil land dispute and they had no authority being there. They had no intention of listening because as they said their 'senior management team' had sat around a table and already made the decision Network Rail owned the land. That is not the job of senior managers in the police. It is a Sheriff's job in a civil court. The BTP officers were sent by their masters to get Network Rail onto the land no matter what. Corrupt to the core. They are not two 'good' officers because they acted unlawfully and abused their police powers. They are corrupt officers.
@@LocalmotionSpain BTP will probably never arrest because there appears to be an arguable case that NR have no right of access. That is pretty obvious from the fact that BTP have been out so many times that the officers and landowners are on first name terms and despite the landowners never changing their position and never unblocking access, they have not been arrested for the same actions - having just done some digging from press reports, that last statement is wrong, the landowners appear to have been arrested several months ago but the case was dropped due to lack of evidence - I would guess that would make BTP officers even more wary of arresting again.
Also the landowners do not need to take a case to the civil court, by blocking access with a padlocked chain across the driveway they have already legitimately asserted their rights, it is NR who need to change the status quo by going to court. NR legal team will know this, if they haven't done so there will be a reason, some weakness in the case, we do not know what that reason is and it is unlikely NR will ever tell us!
The BTP shouldn't even be there as it's a civil matter. Also Ian shouldn't have accepted the caution as it could go against him as it goes on record.
They keep coming out. They can refuse to do so because they admit “I do not know everything about this dispute.”
Opinion is NOT law.
@@Loveofthetruth-m4w Without going through all the video's, are you able to confirm that a civil case has been started in the courts? If so, I don't see why the couple even talk to the police. Seems like a lot of back and forth for a land dispute. I'm guessing NR have a deadline to fix track/station or something and this dispute is causing unacceptable delays now.
Another thought have you searched neighbouring land ownership? As for land relating to a railway...Matt seemed interested in that...the moment that is in dispute. The legal advice to senior BTP, was that independent of network rail solicitors who met with the senior officers? Come to think of it, why do network rail get to meet with them privately? Shouldn't there have been a meeting with all parties?
I wish one person would talk at one time!
Your wife is a nightmare
A very refreshing statement about arrest is not and should not be the first period. However 90% of police in the UK its the first and easiest option
I realise you may be upset but your manner is provocative. The policeman was extremely professional in all his dealings with you - you need to seek legal advice of a solicitor IMHO
I have so many questions..
1) What is it your both wanting exactly? It isnt clear to me as a viewer.. in one hand your saying they are not to go on your land, in the other your saying youll work with them :/
2) its constant from both sides people speaking over each other, questions are not being answered because someone else jumps in and brings up another subject altogether
3) why is it the rail company want access, is it just to maintain the railway?
4) why dont the rail company just drive around the disputed land and do whatever they need to do then?
Police should not be getting involved in a civil land dispute unless someone is making criminal threats or someone has been hurt. This dispute needs to be dealt with by civil court. BTP are putting the corporation before public and are going to be bias in favour of network rail so should not be dealing with this. Once they read you your rights say nothing! That should be the end of your conversation without a lawyer/solicitor present. Stop talking as they will use anything you say against you.
100% and Ian shouldn't have accepted the caution. I can understand Ian's frustration and not realising that a caution goes on record etc. Get a meeting with a Barrister and see if they can take on the case preferably on a win win basis asap
The wife has a 15-year law enforcement, and the husband won't allow her to talk without interrupting her.
the lady keeps talking over both sides and confuses everybody and keeps butting in
They are so rude when people are speaking by always talking over them. Even talking over each other.
They are very frustrated. This has been going on for a long time and NR will not engage with them.
Looks like Police try to provoke this good innocent people to get reason for arrest them
I think it's more likely NR are sick and tired of trying to engage with these, if this is what they call communicating. How many times would you turn up to have to listen to non stop drivel in stereo.
You 2 need to actually listen to them! You keep demanding they listen to you, yet don't offer them the same. They didn't threaten you with arrest, they simply said your arrest was a possible outcome, that's not a threat it's a statement.
You need to stop listening to the comment section experts!
Couldn't agree more, the way this couple 'conduct business' makes you think there is more to this than meets the eye.
Just let them build the footpath.
I doubt you would let them build on your land without your permission. Just let the big companies steal people's land! That's justice.
Surely this could be resolved amicably
If you give Network Rail a inch they will take the whole lot, they have form for this type of thing.
You need representation by a lawyer. Surely if they have access, it will be laid out in the covenants of the deeds. If they owned the track, I would have thought the land boundary would come into the property and bound the track to the extent of the rail network, and would be shown as ownership under it's own title. Let a lawyer tell them it is a civil matter, it will hold more weight.
You two need to just shut up and let the officer speak. I can see you're quite excited about it for gods sake, let the man speak!
I was interested in this so I looked at the land plan. There is a corridor shown to the east of your property in green which lines up with the track where the police are stood. I may be wrong but it looks like that track is outside your land. Difficult to say, it may be a grassed verge to the east of the track. I'd contact a chartered surveyor to physically measure and stake out the boundary on your deeds plan. Also you have a blue shade on your land plan which runs from the track to the south west through your land to the said green corridor. What is this for in the deeds? Is this possibly the burden right of access for Scotrail and not the gated access?
This policeman is great, he politely tries to tell you what legislation he has been instructed to attend with but you wont let him. You invite him towards the building then you throw him off land you’re not even proven to own when he tries politely again. You’re clearly playing to the camera but shouting the guy down is making you look bad.
Why does their “opinion” on a civil dispute have any relevance whatsoever. What a load of utter rubbish
Anyone else think the cameraman sounds like Jimmy Carr?
I have watched all the videos - I still have no idea what the hell is going on. The transport police have been civil with you throughout especially Matt and Scott. What is the actual dispute - you have never explained that. You are beginning to sound like the Sov Cit people we see from USA-based videos. Please let us know what is the ACTUAL problem you are facing - you have never done that. Presumably it's an access/land ownership thing - we get that, but it is so ambiguous from seeing what you have put out. Stop deliberately trying to bait the police - it's not helping your cause. Rule number one - don't be a dick.
You can be civil and still be in the wrong.
No wonder the locals call them the nutty neighbours! This seems like a great fuss over what should have been a straightforward matter. What harm would it do to let Network Rail have access to the site? I am sure that were they to make a mess of the road during their work, they would make it good. This couple seem to be totally bloody minded for no good reason.
What a couple of tossers. Those coppers showed so much patience they deserve an award. I can’t see any sheriff regarding what Network Rail or BTP are attempting to do as any form of corruption. A little applied common sense would have gone a long way to avoiding the whole situation.
@@jamesrussell7775 imagine you own a house and someone wants to come into your bedroom. You call the police saying someone is in trying to break into your home, the police arrive. Now imagine that despite showing all the documents showing you own the house, deeds, land registry documentation, the police will arrest you if you stop the said person entering your home and bedroom. Now ask yourself what emotional state you'd be in, and how would you view the police allowing this?
@@jamesrussell7775 It doesn't matter how nutty they are. Things should still be done legally by NR. If we don't have the rule of law, we don't have any defence against abuse of power.
Even if you are proven to be right network rail will slap you with a compulsory purchase order
Just get yourselves arrested for obstruction and then let them prove it in court
“Some people have had a meeting and decided that the land registry is wrong” 😂
These jokers!
“The forces opinion”
“The forces policy”
They have hung him out to dry sending him there with those words.
This officer needs to decide if he wants to be a policeman or a human being.