I am writing this to clarify some issues and perceptions that people may have regarding my presence here on this property.
My presence on this land is in compliance with the current legislation re the land registration act 2002.
First and foremost I have not broken any laws in being here.
I think it would be clear by now that if I had done so, then the authorities would have been involved immediately and they would have acted. The fact that is not the case is a clear indication of the current legal position.
There is a local family who are claiming ownership of this property. I have made it abundantly clear from the outset that my presence here will be terminated immediately upon examination of clear and unambiguous evidence proving ownership of the land.
I would suggest that my continued presence here on this land some four weeks after I initially arrived is a clear indication that, whilst there may be people who believe that they have a rightful claim to the land, they are clearly not able to provide clear evidence of the epitome of title, and therefore their claim has no merit.
This land is clearly derelict and abandoned with no evidence of recent use. And when i suggest recent I am talking about the last 10 to 20 years at the very least.
Upon my arrival, I had to clear the entrance of a large amount of overgrowth which had completely obscured the fact that an entrance even existed. I had to remove other overgrowth, namely a tree that had fallen over, probably decades ago, and was regrowing in the position it had fallen into. These alone demonstrate the way that this land was in fact abandoned and not in use.
I should also make it clear that I would absolutely not be present on this land if there had been any indication of current use, current ownership, evidence of the land being registered(publicly available information), openings and boundaries being maintained in any way whatsoever. All of these would have indicated a current and active owner, and in those circumstances I would not have entered onto the property.
Before you continue reading this document here are some Questions that people may want to consider
I have given answers to some of these…
What have you actually done here?
I cleared the entrance from decades of overgrowth, trimmed back some trees that had fallen into the path of the caravan that I now have sited here.
Moved all material into a large pile, to be burnt at a later stage. Sited a caravan here. I have trimmed back all of the Japanese Knotweed, and continue to cut this regularly, as well as digging out as much of the root structure as possible.
I have sited a vehicle at the entrance
I have now erected a fence blocking off all but pedestrian access to the site.
There has been no activity carried out here that is irreversible.
Since people turned up, claiming ownership of the site, I have carried out minimal activity on the site apart from to secure my position here
There is CCTV set up at various locations around the site. Some of these are placed in deliberately visible locations so their presence here is obvious.
I have been recording since my arrival.
Do I have the right to do this, enter this land, claim it as my own.
Actually yes, see the current, and I do mean current legislation regarding adverse possession. And just to be very clear, this is legislation that was updated in 2002. It is not some outmoded statute that someone hasn’t bothered to get rid of.
Why was the land abandoned for so long?
If there is an owner, why haven’t they proven this(or been able to prove this), either in the past, or upon my arrival.
If there is an owner, why have they shown no interest or responsibility towards the property until provoked to do so.
Do you think that complete neglect is the actions of a responsible owner?
Do you believe that someone owns something..just because they say that they do??
Do you think that someone who has historically claimed to own something has a greater right than someone who has actual possession, and is attempting to carry out useful activity at the site.
Given the condition of the site when I arrived, have I acted unreasonably, or unlawfully by entering and staying on the site?
Have I made unreasonable demands of anyone claiming to be an owner of the land?
Should I have acted differently, both in regard to the land, and towards the apparent owner?
Should I accept the evidence of the will, and simply withdraw based upon that.
Well, no, the will itself proves nothing. What it does do however is demonstrate that the claimed owner has done nothing to secure their position despite having ample time to do so. Please see the note at the end regarding what the presence of a will does actually demonstrate.
Should I have given the claimed owners more opportunity to demonstrate their ownership
You could ask the question…How much time is enough. And there is a very strong possibility that they would have simply claimed the land for themselves
In reality, their claim to this land has never actually been any greater to that of my own. The fact that they, and people around have a long standing perception about who they believe the land belongs to is not relevant. What matters is actual evidence. And this should exist and be easy to produce if their claim to ownership was valid.
What have others done during my time here
One neighbour has come regularly, from the first day, mostly to question the validity of my actions and seemingly repeat himself. He initially started off extremely hostile, but this has diminished over time, particularly when it was pointed out that overt hostility will never be responded to. He continues to visit, and asserts that it is “his right to do so” as he “has the permission of the owners” . I have now realised that he seems to want to attempt to provoke some kind of reaction as he just seems to want challenge things that appear almost irrelevant.
I did ask him if he was acting on behalf of the claimed owners, but he refused to answer that, so I strongly suspect that he is not.
During his most recent visit he demanded to know what has happened to the fence that was across part of the property and which has collapsed, and in places is partially buried. I told him to go and look for himself. He then stood on the actual fence, demanding to know where it is, when he was actually standing on it. It appears to be provocation just for the sake of. I’m hoping that he’ll eventually tire of his little games…
Initially, in the first week or so, lots of cars slowed down for a better view. Some of these were taking photo’s and video’s, quite for what purpose I have never established.
Various cars have passed, deliberately blowing their horns. I have no idea why. I can only assume that this is an attempt at showing solidarity with the apparent owners, and has been encouraged by them. Whether this is designed to show me the extent of feeling in the community is unclear. I simply ignore it. The behaviour is childish.
If anyone wants to have an issue with me, then I suggest that they come to the site when I am clearly there, and do so directly. I am not an unreasonable person to deal with..
The people claiming ownership have visited numerous times, starting on the day I arrived. On the second day they arrived, showing me the will that has been referred to. Suffice to say, when I suggested that it has no evidential value, the man particularly has a tendency to get upset and angry. They visited twice, later the same day, bringing other people, and making a show of taking photos, video’s, and completely ignoring me apart from pointing cameras and phones in my direction.
My perception is that this is an attempt to intimidate me in some way. It never works.
They have returned various other times, usually accompanied by different people, and always making a very deliberate show of taking photo’s and video’s.
Who am I
Actually, this particular question has absolutely no relevance here.
The ownership of this land, and my identity are in no way linked together. If there is an owner, then no further information is needed.
An interesting note is that there is clearly an attempt to gather information about my identity.
I am unsure how exactly someone thinks that this will in any way assist, or change this situation.
Having this information comes across much more as an attempt to intimidate me, suggesting that the dispute(if there is such) for this property has now been taken to a personal level. Attempting to make this personal appears to be clutching at straws, a sign of desperation, and another sign that there is obviously no clear evidence of ownership.
There are people claiming ownership of this land. What is their position
The people claiming ownership stated that the land was bequeathed (to the lady) based on a will dated 1969 which does in fact refer to this property. However the very presence of this document also clearly shows that the land cannot have been in the possession of the gentleman concerned at the time of his death, or the process of probate would have meant that the title would have passed to his granddaughter in line with the stated wishes in the will itself. The fact that this did not occur, suggests that the property was no longer in the ownership of the family, or that they had no evidence to support this.
They also stated that they carried out activities here, fenced part of the land, and used it to support sheep and pigs for some time.
The fence that they refer to does still exist in some form, but all of the post’s have rotted and collapsed, giving a clear indication that it had not been maintained or repaired since it’s erection
I would like to take the opportunity to point out some elements which appear extremely obvious to me.
That the people claiming ownership clearly did have factual possession at one point in time .
Regardless of their legal claim to the land, this would have given them the means to apply for possessory title, which would then have been upgraded to full title in due time.
The people concerned have stated to me that they are landowners, and have owned, and bought and sold property in the past. This would therefore suggest that they are familiar with the legal requirements for property ownership, and the fact they have failed to resolve the legal ownership of this land may be a matter of regret for them but not one that I feel any duty to give them the opportunity to put right. They have had that opportunity for decades, and simply chose not to use it. Their failure to do so is not my fault.
What is the legal situation
The laws regarding land and property ownership in this country have been enshrined for centuries. The rights of owners are abundantly clear, however there is also an implied right that an owner has to carry out certain measures in order to maintain and protect their title. If there is clear evidence that they are not doing so then that title may be questioned, entirely legitimately as stated in the 2002 act.
And this is not something that can be done frivolously, and at short notice. If a person has full registered title, somebody would have to have been on the land against their(the owners) will for a period of 10 years before they can start the process of making a legitimate claim for ownership. This then allows any legitimate owner a long period of time to displace any attempt to invade or question their ownership.
However if, as in this case, the land has never been registered, the owner can then seek to displace any trespasser, and defend their title in the normal way based upon their possession of title deeds demonstrating the epitome of title in the normal manner.
I would point out that it is only now that the ownership of the land is being challenged, that the so-called owner is making an attempt to claim their ownership. If I had not turned up on this land in this way I would suspect this situation, and the abandonment of this land would have continued indefinitely.
Another important point is that, in the absence of a legal owner, the person in possession of the property has the equivalent legal right to assert, and defend their possession, and the property itself AS IF THEY WERE THE ACTUAL OWNER.
And what does this mean in real terms…
First that I can only be removed by using legal means. Any attempt to simply remove my property would be breaking the law.
Second. Even if someone turned up tomorrow and removed every trace of my existence at the property, and attempted to assert their possession of it because of this, based on the wealth of evidence I have, I could simply apply to the courts to remove them, and re-establish myself. And please, be in no doubt, my claim is legally valid and would succeed.
What is the condition of the land itself?
There is abundant and very obvious evidence of the severe neglect of this land, the most obvious of which is the large area, approximately 30 ft by 60 ft, which is completely dominated by Japanese knotweed whose rampant spread has clearly not been managed, or even attempted to be managed in any way. Further into the property there are numerous trees which have collapsed and fallen, and then regrown in their collapsed state. There is no evidence of any attempt to manage, maintain, or even visit the property for some considerable time.
I believe that the claimed owners have been claiming a single farm payment and that this land is part of their claim. My personal perspective is that while it may be reasonable to encourage landowners to take land out of active use and allow it to become woodlands, or fallow etc is entirely legitimate, but being paid not to do something on a piece of land where there is no evidence of any previous activity is quite frankly extremely questionable.
The boundaries of the land are clearly defined by fences which surround the land and define the neighbouring properties. Whilst there are fences etc within the land, they are almost completely unmaintained and have for the most part collapsed. Again this ties in with the clear impression of the land being abandoned
How can we tell if what you say is true?
It is relatively easy for anybody to establish the truth or otherwise of what I am claiming.
All of the relevant legislation is available to anybody online.
I have deliberately not referenced any statements that I make here. If this matters enough to you, or if you have an interest in this property and wish to dispute my presence here, then you need to carry out your own investigation of the legal situation, and I will not be providing you with a series of links to be able to do that.
I have however carried out all of this research, extensively and know that I have the full weight of UK law supporting my actions.
If anybody wishes to clarify what the condition of the land was before my arrival, then I would suggest using Google Earth as this website can provide satellite imagery dating as far back as the early 1990s. Streetview also shows the same thing.
I could show examples of where land has fallen out of use, but then later brought back into use later on which is obvious by the photo’s over time, and other examples where the opposite is true. Where land that was previously well used has then fallen into disuse over time. There are a number of clear features which would demonstrate either condition.
In the case of the land at Tremain, the satellite images show that there has been no activity at this site over the entire period the images are available for.
There is in my mind no question whatsoever that this land was abandoned, derelict and clearly not in use. There is also clear evidence that the land was unregistered and was unlikely to have an actual owner.
However we then arrive at the current position where I am in factual possession of land.
And I have been asked by various people what my intentions are here.
I have already stated this to the people claiming ownership of the land, but will now repeat the information for any concerned party.
I have actual possession of the land and this gives me the right to to defend my position as if I were the actual owner of property.
The only person(s) who can legitimately displace me from the land is anybody who has genuine evidence of a proper title to the land which would be the same as if the title were being sold, or registered by the land registry.
I intend to remain on the land and carry out activities consistent with being the true owner of the land , regardless of whether this is true or not.
I intend to remain in possession of the land for the 12 years required by the land registry in order to claim full title.
My intentions after I claim full title will be no different to what they are now. I will use the land for whatever purpose I choose to, or am able to, again consistent with the use of an owner in the normal way.
In real terms this means that I will destroy the knotweed, trim and maintain any overhanging trees and branches. The majority of trees here are blackthorne and hazel. I will replace those with a combination of locally sourced hard and soft woods. The boundaries will be maintained. The entrance will be re-established and maintained. The existing building will be maintained and made watertight and secure. And the land will be made use of in some way.
What if someone else has a claim to the land?
If there is anybody who has a genuine claim to this property, and can demonstrate a title to it, then they simply need to provide this information to the courts, and their possession will be quickly established on that basis.
If any person with this information wishes to approach me first and demonstrate their title in the same way, then I will be inclined to remove myself from the land as there is clearly a greater prior claim, and evidence of this.
However the information provided would need to be bullet-proof and clear.
For instance stating that:-
- My grandfather left me this property in his will dated 1969 and even showing me a copy of the will does not in any way demonstrate ownership.
- Stating that everybody around here knows that this belongs to me is a completely meaningless statement and I would suggest in this case clearly has no validity in fact. The fact that everybody around believed that a certain person owned a property when they actually have no evidence that supports that, suggests that people may want to question what they think that they know and believe
- Telling me that they had prior use of the land, and had carried out activities on the land, and are even claiming a farm subsidy based on their non-use of this same land is the same, meaningless.
- None of these points are indicative of clear ownership, and I am absolutely certain that none of these would have any validity were an application to be made to the land registry, who I am aware will scrutinise any claims, including my own, meticulously.
How do I respond when people tell me that I am stealing land?
Well first and foremost, stealing land is a legal nonsense. You cannot steal what has a legitimate owner.
Ownership of land has been one of the strongest elements of UK law for centuries. Think of your ownership of the properties you own. Is the title clear, is it registered? Would you be able to sell it without difficulty? If not registered, would you be able to prove ownership if required to do so, or register it if you chose to, or needed to. If you left a property in a will, would there be a clear title that would be passed on without hindrance.
Do I feel guilty because I am taking something that clearly belongs to somebody else.
Again the answer is no because if it clearly belongs to somebody else they would be able to demonstrate this, and I would immediately be displaced.
Please just think about that for a moment. A genuine legitimate owner can displace me with very little effort and very little cost. They just have to take me to court and show evidence of ownership. I would be ordered to leave very quickly. And I am well aware of this. The fact that i remain on this property is clearly an indication that there remains no legitimate owner regardless of the claims or otherwise of some people
This land was clearly bequeathed in a will therefore you have no right to take it.
As stated previously, the rules of probate and inheritance in this country are equally well established and historical, and the fact that the land was not passed on according to the written will suggests one of two things.
- First that the person writing the will no longer had the actual ownership of the land at time of their death
- The probate was not completed in a timely and professional manner.
Given that other land and property was clearly passed on in the appropriate way this would suggest that the second is extremely unlikely, so the first point is much more likely.
Yet again I would state that what people think or what they believe is the state of affairs is irrelevant. What matters, yet again, is what can be factually proven.
This land clearly belongs to somebody else, you should have informed them, giving them the opportunity to prove their ownership before you took possession.
Why on earth would I want to do that? Their ownership of the land if there was any such ownership has been characterised by abandonment and neglect. I consider myself much more likely to do something purposeful with the land, and would never allow it to remain in its previously poor state.
If I had announced my intentions and made them aware that their claimed ownership was under threat, they would have undoubtedly taken steps to take possession of the land themselves and secure their position. The fact that they had clearly neglected the land to the point of it being obviously abandoned has, in my opinion, negated any claim to ownership they may have made.
To put this simply.
If they had inherited the land then they should have ensured that the documents to prove it were in place at that time, not 40 or 50 years later.
If, and I have no doubt that they actually were in possession of, and at the same time were making use of the land, at some point in time, then they clearly had the right and the legal basis for making a legitimate claim for ownership in the absence of any further evidence. They could have done this 30 to 40 years ago as far as i am aware, but for whatever reasons chose not to do so.
If they have evidence of ownership of the property, and the fact that they are claiming a farm subsidy that includes this land, suggests that they believed that they own the property, then they should have resolved this as soon as they were aware that the status of it was questionable.
In almost every instance, the opportunity to regularise the ownership of this land has existed, apparently unchallenged for decades, but no attempt has been made to do so.
And to put this into perspective. The current cost of applying for a title through the land registry where the title can be shown to have been destroyed, lost, or mislaid is less than £100. It requires one form to be filled out, a map showing the location, and the boundaries of the land being referred to, and in most cases, a statement of truth. This is not something that is likely to cost thousands of pounds, does not require a surveyor, and these days a solicitor isn’t even needed as everything is held on a central database. In other words, this could have been done, at any time, at minimal cost, and with relatively little effort. The cost of doing this any time in the last 50 years would have been proportionately less.
What action, if any, can be taken against me?
There is nothing to stop anybody coming onto this land at any time . However as has been pointed out previously, I am in full legal possession and therefore I do have the right to to maintain and defend that possession which is clearly enshrined in law.
Coming onto land is of itself an issue of trespass, but this is a civil issue and for the most part probably not worth pursuing unless there is accompanying damage or removal of property.
If any attempt is made to interfere with any of the property currently on this site, all of which belongs to me, all of which is well documented, photographed, recorded etc, this will be dealt with as an offence, and there will be clear evidence of the identity of the perpetrator. I would be asking the police to deal with this and then there are likely to be legal consequences.
There has already been an issue regarding someone coming to the site and attempting to damage one of the cameras I have recording here. This matter has been reported to the local police and CCTV footage of the events has been passed on. I now have a crime number regarding this offence so it is being dealt with by way of a caution in the first instance.
The event was quite ill-conceived and thoughtless. However if there are any instances where there is significant damage to property, attempt to remove items etc then the full weight of the law will be brought to bear and I will have no no hesitation in taking things to that level.
Is it my fault that other people have not taken reasonable steps to secure their ownership of this land
Is it my fault that the law leaves it open for me to take possession and claim ownership?
Is it my fault that the land has been completely neglected for decades
I find it remarkable that people appear to be distressed about something about which they have no clear knowledge, just ill informed opinions, none of which appear to have any basis in reality
I am now asking to be reasonably left alone.
I am doing no harm. There is clearly some frustration for some people at the current situation, but that will diminish over time. Others have had their opportunity here. Now it is time for mine.
As previously stated I intend to restore and maintain this land and bring it back into a usable condition. This will take work and commitment, effort and cost, none of which have been demonstrated at all by the previously claimed owners. If I had not taken possession of the land I have no doubt that the condition of it would have remained unchanged for the next 20 to 30 years as the claimed owners really had no interest in engaging in any purposeful activity here, but were clearly more than happy to be given a public subsidy for doing absolutely nothing.
Finding out personal information about me, not only has a feel that it implies some form of personal threat, but has no relevance here.
The owner simply has to prove their ownership, and I will have no alternative but to leave.
I have caused no real damage here. The property has actually been cleaned up, and had some work done on it which should have occurred decades ago.
If an owner has made no attempt to prove their ownership, has made no attempt to properly use, or maintain the property, then they have completely failed in the basic responsibilities of ownership itself.
I personally object to property being neglected and abandoned when someone could be deriving some benefit from the possession of it, and improving the environment, not only for themselves.
This was to all intents and purposes, abandoned land, and would remain so had I not established my presence here.
The fact that people are determined to claim now what has clearly never had value for them in the past is completely hypocritical.
I just want to be left alone to continue to improve and add value to this land.
**********************************
Comments upon the presence of the (grandfathers) will
The presence of this will actually serves to prove a number of points.
The probate process would have highlighted any problems with any title of any land owned making them aware of the lack of title.
Prior to this, people could have gone for years, blissfully unaware of any issue regarding their ownership of property. The death of, and the will of the grandfather would have brought that ignorance to an end. If the property had been bequeathed in a will, then the title and papers supporting that would have been closely examined, or their absence noted.
This is then the point at which any issues should have been resolved.
They clearly weren’t.
This has effectively set a clock ticking which then shows that they must have been aware of the above, and yet took no action to remedy the situation.
And the effort required to resolve this at the time would be no different to the situation that exists today. And the cost, and difficulty of this. Negligible in real terms, and ironically, could have been charged to the grandfather’s estate if done at the time.
And in terms of time, the situation could have been resolved in a matter of six years with full title(given that there would presumably already be evidence of six years of possession at the time)
There have been any number of opportunities to remedy the situation since that time
The reason this wasn’t done was the perception that the land was of no value, and therefore not worth going to the effort over.
What is interesting is that the land is not worth going to any effort over, or has no perceived value…Until someone else shows an interest in it, and then it seems the opposite is true. I own it, it has value, I will fight to keep it.
It’s a bit like throwing something away because it’s broken and of no use to you, then attempting to claim it back when someone else retrieves it from the rubbish. It must therefore have value, so I want it now.
This was a choice that has been made over the last 30 — 40 years. Let us be in no doubt about this.
The only value this land has held for the perceived owner was to be able to claim an extra allowance, in this case for doing absolutely nothing.
At least their use and management of the land has been entirely consistent. Characterised solely by disinterest, and neglect. Until now that is.
A responsible owner would have resolved any ownership issue as soon as they became aware of them.
And finally
If anyone wishes to contact me in any way, say something, make a comment, statement, observation etc, they are more than welcome to do so. Just use the contact form below. Please note, there is no box for return contact information, so unless you include contact details in the text, what you submit is entirely anonymous. Say whatever you wish to.