blocked off bridlepath

[JenJ]

I would feel sorry for the buyers and say they were unlucky with the searches but having read about their tactics and behaviour on the other thread and the estate agent saying they mentioned it to them when they bought it I'm less inclined to think that they were unwitting victims.

If you mean the thread linked in post 4, that's an entirely different path.

 

[Squeak]

Totally different property.

If you mean the thread linked in post 4, that's an entirely different path.

Oh, my mistake, too confusing for a Monday apparently

 

[criso]

But observing it being used and it being a legal pathway are two different things. I may be being over generous I suppose, but like I said if due diligence was done legally when purchasing the property I can see why there would be this issue.

The map showed a route but the statement which you see when hovering over the map mentioned their house by name.

"passing between Breach House and two Cottages to the W across O.S. 124"

Knowing it was in use I would have expected very careful scrutiny and to have read the statement.

 

[ElleSkywalker]

There was a bridleway sign at the end of the route by their gate wasn't there that they removed when they blocked the gate off? If there was an official sign, and people were using on a daily basis, their solicitors should have checked and made them aware there was a discrepancy between the map and the wording and that it wouldn't just be a case of them closing it because they didn't want it there. The previous owner and the estate agents also state they told them about it.

I do feel they were let down by their solicitors, however I don't think they weren't aware, they just thought they could do what they liked and would get away with it which luckily hasn't happened.

 

[ester]

I read it that the council removed the sign

 

[ycbm]

I think horse people are much more aware of how rights of way work than others. I think many ordinary house buyers would have assumed that the OS map and the council showed the correct path and horse riders were being cheeky and could legally be stopped.

Their solicitors, on the other hand .....
.

 

[criso]

I read it that the council removed the sign

Assuming the article is correct, it says the sign was removed by the council in 2020

It says they bought the property 10 years ago and blocked the path off in 2019 so the sign came down after they'd blocked the path.

Perhaps they applied to have the sign removed or brought the graphic part of the map to the council's attention. It's been challenged since it was blocked off and finally a ruling has been made.

I'm sure they'll challenge it though so it won't be rideable just yet.

I agree the solicitors should noticed and made them aware of the definitive statement and should have advised them that with continuous use for decades, it was a possibility that it was there to stay.

 

[I'm Dun]

Assuming the article is correct, it says the sign was removed by the council in 2020

It says they bought the property 10 years ago and blocked the path off in 2019 so the sign came down after they'd blocked the path.

Perhaps they applied to have the sign removed or brought the graphic part of the map to the council's attention. It's been challenged since it was blocked off and finally a ruling has been made.

I'm sure they'll challenge it though so it won't be rideable just yet.

I agree the solicitors should noticed and made them aware of the definitive statement and should have advised them that with continuous use for decades, it was a possibility that it was there to stay.

I think it was taken down as it wasn't usable and it had already started going though official channels.

 

[criso]

I think horse people are much more aware of how rights of way work than others. I think many ordinary house buyers would have assumed that the OS map and the council showed the correct path and horse riders were being cheeky and could legally be stopped.

Their solicitors, on the other hand .....
.

I also know that particular map as moving to a new bit of Hertfordshire, I used it to find out the local paths. The statement pops up when you click on a path, it's really useful as a statement like goes past Breach house as in this case is helpful in knowing where to turn when you are riding. The format of map of the council website has changed but I've just checked and I can still see the statement by clicking on any row including this one 18.

I find it hard to believe that a professional checking for them given the signs and usage didn't see that.

 

[mariew]

I have no sympathy. They would have known but banking on being able to change it.

 

[dorsetladette]

Looking on google street view it's very obvious (I think) where the entrance to the bridle way is/was. They have moved their driveway entrance and crudely blocked the original gate with garden waste and branches. The entrance they are suggesting is correct is a block paved driveway leading to a lawn and garden.

ETA - google street view is dated 2021

 

[criso]

I saw the Daily Mirror repeating the story on Facebook. I was surprised that the vast majority of comments were against the couple, I would have thought it might be more divided outside the horsey community.

 

[Miss_Millie]

I personally think that it is extremely entitled behaviour, regardless. If that path has been a right of way for over 100 years, why should they have special treatment just because they've decided they don't like it? If they have spent over 250k on the legal battle of trying to get rid of it, they clearly aren't hard up on cash and could have moved to a different house if it REALLY bothered them that much.

It strikes me that they presume money can buy everything, even these few shared spaces that we have left.

 

[marmalade76]

I feel sorry for them. They did searches and the council supplied details showing the bridle path was in a completely different place with houses between it and them. Now it runs right past their windows.

The council should, I think, pick up the costs of rerouting the path or compensate the buyers for their mistake.

The bridleway was mentioned in the particulars for the house and they were told about it by the estate agent and former owner. On viewing, the location of the bridleway was obvious, it's very clearly a gated track next to the house that looks like it could be part of a separate property rather than "through the garden". They bought the place knowing all this and tried their luck on getting it closed, locked gates as well as blocking them with brash. They took their chances and lost and rightly so, no sympathy at all.

We've had similar here with a house backing onto the river which has a PROW all along the bank, first they put a fence across the path, they were made to take this down, then they blocked the passage under the bridge with bricks, they let their GSD harass people as they walked, now they've fenced it in a way that forces people down the slope of the riverbank, someone's going to fall in one day.

 

[ester]

I can imagine a conversation with the conveyencers that went 'can you pay particular attention to the bridlepath?' reply 'oh look don't worry it doesn't actually go that way'

 

[Fred66]

I am slightly bemused by people saying they knew it was in daily use, how?

When you go to look at a house chances are you are there for tops of an hour, you might go back a couple of times but in total you are unlikely to be there for more than 2-3 hrs spread across as many visits. This is unlikely to ascertain whether there is regular use of the bridle path.

Equally I’m not an expert on searches but presumably the solicitors expect to rely on the information given to them by the council.

I’m with ycbm on this, in that I sympathize with their plight

 

[PurpleSpots]

I am slightly bemused by people saying they knew it was in daily use, how?

At a guess because the path/track would be worn down, possibly with tracks of feet and/or hooves, and any gateway would show marks of being moved in an arc, or with free potential to do so?

 

[Errin Paddywack]

The bridleway was mentioned in the particulars for the house and they were told about it by the estate agent and former owner. On viewing, the location of the bridleway was obvious, it's very clearly a gated track next to the house that looks like it could be part of a separate property rather than "through the garden". They bought the place knowing all this and tried their luck on getting it closed, locked gates as well as blocking them with brash. They took their chances and lost and rightly so, no sympathy at all.

They have no sympathy from me at all. They were obviously just arrogant enough to think they could shut it and that money talks. Well not always as they are finding out. Bridlepaths are inshort supply these days and need to be kept open especially where they are well used. We have a footpath along the side of one of our fields and it is very obviously well used as there is a worn track.

 

[criso]

I am slightly bemused by people saying they knew it was in daily use, how?

When you go to look at a house chances are you are there for tops of an hour, you might go back a couple of times but in total you are unlikely to be there for more than 2-3 hrs spread across as many visits. This is unlikely to ascertain whether there is regular use of the bridle path.

Equally I’m not an expert on searches but presumably the solicitors expect to rely on the information given to them by the council.

I’m with ycbm on this, in that I sympathize with their plight

The sellers and the estate agents told them about the bridlepath. The estate agent who sold it said his parents owned the house in the 70s and claims to have discussed it several times. Presumably there would have been hoofprints and poos and if dog walkers using it, those little plastic poo bags left in trees. Plus it's not an isolated stretch, it carries on and joins other paths, the picture with all the branches is the other end.

The council's website says "The definitive map, together with the definitive statements, is a legal record of public rights of way in Hertfordshire. It's based on information which was correct in December 2015, plus confirmed orders made since."

If you go to the definitive map and click on the path, you get the statement which mentions the path goes past their house. Before 2015 it was a different format (not GIS) but it worked in the same way as 2013 was when I moved to a private yard and had to work out hacking routes.

The BHS in Herts has a good record of getting paths confirmed or added to the definitive map even when not on the map and opposed.

This was another one that was finally won after 10 years.

Broxbourne Woods, Hertfordshire Bridleway

I am pleased to report that the decision letter (04.09.2024) has just come out for the Broxbourne Woods case. The Inspector has confirmed the order. I think we're all grateful to BHS HQ for funding an advocate for this one, to John Featherstone for making the original application (last century!)...

forums.horseandhound.co.uk

 

[PeterNatt]

I am slightly bemused by people saying they knew it was in daily use, how?

When you go to look at a house chances are you are there for tops of an hour, you might go back a couple of times but in total you are unlikely to be there for more than 2-3 hrs spread across as many visits. This is unlikely to ascertain whether there is regular use of the bridle path.

Equally I’m not an expert on searches but presumably the solicitors expect to rely on the information given to them by the council.

I’m with ycbm on this, in that I sympathize with their plight

The estate agent advised them of the existence of the Bridleway. They waited several years before closing it.