Hi thanks for your question. My name is ***** ***** I can assist with this.
Can you tell me how long the animals have been grazing the land for please?
Animals grazing from 1963 , time that it was sold but my grandfather grazed it previous to this.
we being grazing it to last week when they erected boundary fences and evited our animals with giving us any notice at all. 3 aof our animals are now hurt from their dogs, we noticed today.
Okay. The law is this area is very complex and confusing, but in essence, if you have been grazing the land for 20 years or more, then you're likely to be able to stand a good chance of showing that you have the right to continue to do so.
what about Adverse Posession ??.
Yes, this is possible, if you have fenced off the lend for more than 12 years (which it sounds like you have) and thus demonstrated your intention to keep the land and exclude everybody else, including the true owner.
If you can file an appropriate statutory declaration evidencing your use of the land for so long, and that it has been fenced off, then I expect you should be able to get title to the land.
Does this answer your question?
Do you want to ask me more specific things about this?
would grazing the land account for excluding the true owner ?.
also if my grazing rights application was successful, would they have to remove the boundary fences again ??
No, it wouldn't because it doesn't mean necessarrily that you would exclude the true owner.
If you had grazing rights they wouldnt have to remove the fence necessarily, only allow you to graze.
what examples would exclude the true owner ??
Really, it's a case of fencing it off and showing that you intend it to be yours.
when my father erected the fence, the owner made him sign something but didn`t tell him what it was. would this stand in court ??.
Depends what it was. If this was a consent form, to fence off, for example, then this would prevent him claiming adverse possession I expect.
also my father and uncle are tennants in common, so his signature alone would be of no use, both signatures required ??
No, the permission of one owner would likely defeat an adverse possession claim.
both signatures required for everything else ?. Is there any other law that we could claim under for our right ?
could we defend that he wasnt given legal advise and that he was unaware of what he was signing ?
No, I think your profits claim or adverse possession claim is the right.course for you.
so the adverse posession route is not for us ?
Ignorance of the law is no answer to anything really, so that's not usually a basis. If somebody is illiterate and cannot read and they're told its a different document to what it truly is, then you can then argue that it's not what it was said to be, but otherwise it's very difficult indeed to run this argument.
It depends what he has signed.
based on the consent for fencing , signed by one party. How does the land registry, grazing rights application works ?
Grazing rights are different - but again, was permission given, and if so, it might be that there is right to graze under that consent.
Prescription easements/profits are based on no consent from the owner.
no consent was given to graze. when application was made, notice served to owner and if he objects, can we appeal the decision ??
how much does bring a case to court roughyly costs ??
would a consent from the owner to allow fencing defeat an Easment Prescription claim if no grazing was mentioned in the consent.
To address the issue of whether you have rights etc., would likely require contested court proceedings. These could cost £1,000 to £50,000 or more, it's always hard to say.
were they allowed to evict our animals without giving notice ?
No, not if you have the right to be there because, for example, you have the right to possession or grazing rights. if you didn't have such rights, then yes, they would be allowed to require the animals be removed without notice.
If the owner , leases out this property. who would hold the dominant right, leasee or person holding grazing right ??
the grazing right is a right that would bind the owner. So, even if it's leased out, you would still have grazing rights.
so if grazing rights obtained on this property, can the owner not graze animals on it too ??
Yes, the owner can, you woulld both be able to.
The owner can do anything on its own land, but the right is subject to your rights too.
what if he leases the property out, the leasee would be able to too ??. also if direct payments from EU are obtained from the property. the grazing rights and leasee applied for them, who would obtain them or would the have to be shared ??
Yes, that's right, the lesee. I dont know the position about direct EU payments I'm afraid, that's a pretty specialist area of law that I don't know the answer to.
But, my feeling is that it would be paid to the owner, and then it's a dispute between owner and person with grazing rights as to who gets what.
there was no boundary between both properties. they sent out a surveyor to map the boundary but we still think the markings is off. but they would not listen and they fenced it on their predictions, they would not listen us.
So you need to make a choice then about what you do next - presumably, you'd write to them insisting on being able to use your grazing rights etc. first, but if they refuse, you'd see a solicitor and look at going to Court.
thanks for your advice Tony, very helpful. thanks again.
Thank you. ***** check you're happy with the service today please?
yes very happy Tony.
Thank you! Hope this goes well and you get what you need from it! Good luck!