Woman blocks neighbours views by building high wall 4 inches from her neighbours windows.

"A woman who built a two-metre wooden fence inches from her neighbour’s windows has defended her actions - and has the backing of a Government agency.
Kate Chubb built the fence around her six-acre plot in Beeks Mill, St Catherine, in Somerset.
Her neighbours complained about the erection and lodged an appeal to force her to take it down.
But Ms Chubb won a blocking to the appeal and has been told by the Planning Inspectorate that it can stay up - provided it isn’t extended.
Her neighbours are angry over the decision issued on February 3, as one said she is “appalled”, reports the Bath Chronicle .
Neighbours Janice and Anthony Hemms, whose Papermill Cottage property now has three windows on the ground floor within four inches of the timber structure."






I bet she is really pleased with herself.

Her neighbours complained about the erection and lodged an appeal to force her to take it down.
*  *  *  *
Her neighbours are angry over the decision issued on February 3, as one said she is “appalled”, reports the Bath Chronicle .

What are the neighbors complaining about (the article doesn't say), a missing view into the adjoining bedroom?  Unless there are set-back restrictions in the zoning, it's all good.

Too many folks here seem to think they have a "right to light" ........They don't. And whilst insensitive, in fact probably downright rude, as long as the fence meets planning regs you can build it.

I'd hate to have my windows blocked by a fence. I think I'd be tempted to cut a window-shaped hole in her stupid fence.

Original Quill wrote:

Her neighbours complained about the erection and lodged an appeal to force her to take it down.
*  *  *  *
Her neighbours are angry over the decision issued on February 3, as one said she is “appalled”, reports the Bath Chronicle .

What are the neighbors complaining about (the article doesn't say), a missing view into the adjoining bedroom?  Unless there are set-back restrictions in the zoning, it's all good.

Oh sorry...I forgot to post the full story.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-builds-wooden-fence-blocking-9777430

Her own property is far away from the fence, surely she could have build this further away from her neighbours house. Or maybe erected barbed wire instead of a block wooden fence that completely obliterates her neighbours view?

eddie wrote:I'd hate to have my windows blocked by a fence. I think I'd be tempted to cut a window-shaped hole in her stupid fence.

In my opinion the woman has been spiteful and selfish.

We all have to live together in society....why deliberately spoil someones view and light when you don't have to?
She is a neighbour from hell in my opinion.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:I'd hate to have my windows blocked by a fence. I think I'd be tempted to cut a window-shaped hole in her stupid fence.

In my opinion the woman has been spiteful and selfish.

We all have to live together in society....why deliberately spoil someones view and light when you don't have to?
She is a neighbour from hell in my opinion.

It was an extremely unfriendly and unfair thing to do. Her land is big enough to have brought that fence further from that house.

Somehow I think we are not getting to the real reasons. Private property is private property. I'm as socialist as the next guy, but unless you are going to do away with the idea of private property, it's legitimate. The fence is on the neighbor's property, and the lady hasn't paid for the view.

But I'm setting up what is my real question: isn't this a 'spite' situation? Something set this off. Spite houses are not uncommon...



...so surely a spit fence would require less.

eddie wrote:I'd hate to have my windows blocked by a fence. I think I'd be tempted to cut a window-shaped hole in her stupid fence.

I wouldn't just be tempted
sections would just disappear at night.

see how many times she can afford to rebuild it

that would be real clever of you

one trail camera and bang you have a criminal record.....which may impinge on your ability to do all sorts of things.

for instance

your car and home insurance will go up or be refused...

if your home insurance is refused and you have a mortgage you may (will) end up with a repossession order.

etc...


very clever ...innit...


face it the woman is within her lawful rights to have done this ...miserable git though she is.....
besides...we dont know what the complaing neighbour has been like do we....?

LOL
one missing trail camera too
Or a just Mask or cover
and deny deny deny

You must have lived a soft and sheltered life, if you think any of that is a problem

I blame the ones doing the whinging -- rather than her wot built the wall/fence...

They buy into a neighbourhood knowing there is that place next door, and should at least know what local building regulations/ordinances are..

If there are no existing "set backs"/ minimum distances, protection of sunlight, protection of privacy/amenity and the likes written into council ordinances or by-laws  --  than what rights do they have to complain ?

(Obviously the council allowed the property boundary to be within 4 inches of the house -- or the house to be built within 4 inches of the boundary (whichever came first..) -- instead of requiring a minimum setback (e.g. 4 foot on a suburban block, or maybe 20 feet (or more..)) on an acreage..).

Clearly another case of "buyer beware" when somebody buys into any particular neighbourhood  ???

I would hate this. Why now build a fence when there wasn't one when they moved into the house.

I think the neighbour is being so nasty whether the law is on her side or not. Surely she could have put up smaller fence or left it as it was.

The spite house in Alameda was the result of a sneaky deal. The home owner to the right backed out of a deal to buy the remaining land, ostensibly leaving the owner with a worthless few feet of property, which the former thought he would leave vacant safeguarding his view without paying for it. The result was the spite house.

On it's own it looks like the spite house owner was simply being selfish. In the present case, the fence looks even more selfish. But I would bet anything that there is a backstory that tells all...like, maybe the people backed out of a deal that would buy the property to preserve their view.

This is business. Pharma companies do this all the time: limit supply to jack up prices...even on something that could be lifesaving. Here we're just talking about a view.

veya_victaous wrote:LOL
one missing trail camera too
Or a just Mask or cover
and deny deny deny

You must have lived a soft and sheltered life, if you think any of that is a problem

so then you meet several large fellows with ill intent...

you really need to grow up veya......

magica wrote:I would hate this. Why now build a fence when there wasn't one when they moved into the house.

I think the neighbour is being so nasty whether the law is on her side or not. Surely she could have put up smaller fence or left it as it was.

I agree. The neighbour who has had her light and view obliterated seems to have done nothing to antagonize her neighbour, and apparently the neighbour is legally allowed to put her fence 4 inches from the other womans house.
But legal or not...it's spiteful and nasty, and why she has to emphasise she is a single mother is beyond me....that has nothing to do with anything.

She has lots of land, she could have built a fence or erected a wire fence further away from the house.....that would have been the decent thing to do.

Lord Foul wrote:Too many folks here seem to think they have a "right to light" ........They don't. And whilst insensitive, in fact probably downright rude, as long as the fence meets planning regs you can build it.

Are you sure?

"In effect, the owner of a building with windows that have received natural daylight for 20 years or more is entitled to forbid any construction or other obstruction that would deprive him or her of that illumination. Neighbours cannot build anything that would block the light without permission"



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_light

Yes Syl wire would have sufficed. I think it was done deliberately to make the neighbour in the house life a misery. Who wants a fence backed up to their window? Nasty women.

magica wrote:Yes Syl  wire would have sufficed. I think it was done deliberately to make the neighbour in the house life a misery. Who wants a fence backed up to their window?  Nasty women.

There was another case in the news recently. A woman had deliberately planted fast growing Leylandii trees across the border of her property. She blocked the view of the valleys and countryside beyond for quite a few neighbours, she let them grow to a ridiculous height......and having planted those trees myself I can vouch for the fact that they never stop growing.

That is ridiculously mean. If there's another house on your border and you have plenty of room, the decent thing is to put the fence further into your own land - it's just what a normal person would do.

Raggamuffin wrote:That is ridiculously mean. If there's another house on your border and you have plenty of room, the decent thing is to put the fence further into your own land - it's just what a normal person would do.

Of course I agree...but I am a LW'r. However, as an inquisitive person I would like to hear the other side of the story.

She apparently erected the fence to protect her cattle. The same thing applies - she didn't have to erect it right next to their windows.

If she has cattle in that field, and if no fence meant that the cows might cause damage or harm to her neighbour then what's she to do? If it meant I might get sued, I'd put up the fence.

A wire fence would've sufficed, then no blocking the window.

If she was worried about her cattle, why wasn't there a fence there to start with.

magica wrote:A wire fence would've sufficed, then no blocking the window.

If she was worried about her cattle, why wasn't there a fence there to start with.

It's her land. That's the bottom line. I don't agree with it, but if her plea is health and safety, blah blah then there's not much you can do. However, I'm sure that if this cuts out enough light, her neighbour could appeal.

HoratioTarr wrote:If she has cattle in that field, and if no fence meant that the cows might cause damage or harm to her neighbour then what's she to do?   If it meant I might get sued, I'd put up the fence.

She was more worried about the cattle getting hurt on the windows. I still say there was no need to put the fence so close to her neighbours' house.

Raggamuffin wrote:She apparently erected the fence to protect her cattle. The same thing applies - she didn't have to erect it right next to their windows.

So there is more to the story.  We still need more information...why the fence and not barbed-wire?  Could be cost.  Could be cows spray a lot when they pee. Could be some other danger peculiar to the type of barrier.  Clearly, she's entitled to put any barrier up against the property line, so placement is not the issue.  Now, why the 2-meter, solid wood fence?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:She apparently erected the fence to protect her cattle. The same thing applies - she didn't have to erect it right next to their windows.

So there is more to the story.  We still need more information...why the fence and not barbed-wire?  Could be cost.  Could be cows spray a lot when they pee.  Could be some other danger peculiar to the type of barrier.  Clearly, she's entitled to put any barrier up against the property line, so placement is not the issue.  Now, why the 2-meter, solid wood fence?

I don't know why. Anyway, I'm talking about common human decency where a reasonable person wouldn't dream of putting a high fence right next to someone's windows.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

So there is more to the story.  We still need more information...why the fence and not barbed-wire?  Could be cost.  Could be cows spray a lot when they pee.  Could be some other danger peculiar to the type of barrier.  Clearly, she's entitled to put any barrier up against the property line, so placement is not the issue.  Now, why the 2-meter, solid wood fence?

I don't know why. Anyway, I'm talking about common human decency where a reasonable person wouldn't dream of putting a high fence right next to someone's windows.

"Reasonable" depends upon the facts. Someone needs to ask the landowner why s/he chose a 2-meter wooden fence.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't know why. Anyway, I'm talking about common human decency where a reasonable person wouldn't dream of putting a high fence right next to someone's windows.

"Reasonable" depends upon the facts.  Someone needs to ask the landowner why s/he chose a 2-meter wooden fence.

I think it's unreasonable by default to erect a tall fence 4 inches from someone's window.

Having visited many farms with cattle over the years, i'v never seen a 6ft wooden fence to keep Cattle in. 2 or 3 barbed wire strands are the norm, some with a 12v battery. This is just pure spite.

Looking at that photo, I suspect that there was a typical wire farm fence there originally --  and that she has put up that paling fence so that she doesn't have to look at her neighbours any more...

As nasty as it may be, there are no laws simply against spiteful behaviour,  is there ?

The final responsibility, though, still has to be shared between the house owner and the local council --  why was the house built so close to the boundary,  or alternatively why was the boundary line placed so close to the house, if the house was there first (i.e. before the house block was split off from the acreage ?)

"Caveat emptor"  !

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Looking at that photo, I suspect that there was a typical wire farm fence there originally --  and that she has put up that paling fence so that she doesn't have to look at her neighbours any more...

As nasty as it may be, there are no laws simply against spiteful behaviour,  is there ?

The final responsibility, though, still has to be shared between the house owner and the local council --  why was the house built so close to the boundary,  or alternatively why was the boundary line placed so close to the house, if the house was there first (i.e. before the house block was split off from the acreage ?)

"Caveat emptor"  !

I agree with that bit. Boundaries are often very close to the edge of a house but I suppose there usually aren't any windows involved so it doesn't matter that much.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

"Reasonable" depends upon the facts.  Someone needs to ask the landowner why s/he chose a 2-meter wooden fence.

I think it's unreasonable by default to erect a tall fence 4 inches from someone's window.

Would it be unreasonable if Donald Trump did it?

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:I'd hate to have my windows blocked by a fence. I think I'd be tempted to cut a window-shaped hole in her stupid fence.

In my opinion the woman has been spiteful and selfish.

We all have to live together in society....why deliberately spoil someones view and light when you don't have to?
She is a neighbour from hell in my opinion.

she may well have been but there is probably more going on here than the report states. sounds like there is some dispute between the 2 of them.
if she has abided by the planning regulations then there is little the other party can do no matter how "spiteful and petty" it may seem.


and if Eddie cut a hole in the fence then she would get done for criminal damage.
neighbours should get on where ever possible, it can save a fortune that might be better spent on a hitman.

if the neighbour had consulted with her they could surely have come to some agreement about the section in front of her window and replaced it with some sort of glass, netting affair so she still had some sort of view. I suspect there is more to this than meets the eye.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Syl wrote:

In my opinion the woman has been spiteful and selfish.

We all have to live together in society....why deliberately spoil someones view and light when you don't have to?
She is a neighbour from hell in my opinion.

she may well have been but there is probably more going on here than the report states. sounds like there is some dispute between the 2 of them.
if she has abided by the planning regulations then there is little the other party can do no matter how "spiteful and petty" it may seem.

Thank you...that has been my point throughout. There is a backstory here that is interesting, and may at some point be deserving of our personal judgment, but as long as the law supports private property the fence is legitimate.

Also, can they even open the windows? What if they need work done on the outside next to the fence? They won't be able to get at it.

Original Quill wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
she may well have been but there is probably more going on here than the report states. sounds like there is some dispute between the 2 of them.
if she has abided by the planning regulations then there is little the other party can do no matter how "spiteful and petty" it may seem.

Thank you...that has been my point throughout.  There is a backstory here that is interesting, and may at some point be deserving of our personal judgment, but as long as the law supports private property the fence is legitimate.

true enough although in the UK there are some laws that refer to blocking of natural light and in those cases you may have to remove the offending tree, fence, object.
seems they dont apply here though.

Raggamuffin wrote:Also, can they even open the windows? What if they need work done on the outside next to the fence? They won't be able to get at it.

Perhaps they should sue the architect for placing the building so close to the property line. He should have included a reasonable set-back for work and maintenance.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/smallholder-near-bath-defends-8203-erecting-two-metre-wooden-fence-inches-from-neighbour-s-windows/story-30118691-detail/story.html

I don't think there was any disagreement between the two neighbours before the fence debacle.
In one report the woman who has the fence erected next to her property stated that she had tried her best to keep the negotiations friendly.

Oddly, the cows don't even belong to the woman who has had the fence erected.....they belong to a neighbouring farmer.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Also, can they even open the windows? What if they need work done on the outside next to the fence? They won't be able to get at it.

Perhaps they should sue the architect for placing the building so close to the property line.  He should have included a reasonable set-back for work and maintenance.

I am sure that would be fine had they not been built probably a century or more ago.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Perhaps they should sue the architect for placing the building so close to the property line.  He should have included a reasonable set-back for work and maintenance.

I am sure that would be fine had they not been built probably a century or more ago.

Yeah, I thought of that too. But that's where the fault--or negligence--lies.

Original Quill wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
I am sure that would be fine had they not been built probably a century or more ago.

Yeah, I thought of that too.  But that's where the fault--or negligence--lies.  

more likely the land around there originally belonged to a large estate and has been parcelled off over the years. the area in general would have been farming of one sort or another for generations, it is very rural.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Perhaps they should sue the architect for placing the building so close to the property line.  He should have included a reasonable set-back for work and maintenance.

I am sure that would be fine had they not been built probably a century or more ago.

The final decision on setbacks from the boundary still comes down to council planning permissions...

Nothing to do with any architects -- even if one were even involved -- as the council's building inspector signs off building works; while the council rules on subdivision boundaries..

So.. Who in the council allowed the boundary to only be 4 inches from the walls and windows ?

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, I thought of that too.  But that's where the fault--or negligence--lies.  

more likely the land around there originally belonged to a large estate and has been parcelled off over the years. the area in general would have been farming of one sort or another for generations, it is very rural.

Yes. I found it on a map - it really is in the middle of nowhere. I suppose the view made up for that, and now they don't even have that.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
I am sure that would be fine had they not been built probably a century or more ago.

The final decision on setbacks from the boundary still comes down to council planning permissions...

Nothing to do with any architects --  even if one were even involved --  as the council's building inspector signs off building works;  while the council rules on subdivision boundaries..

So..  Who in the council allowed the boundary to only be 4 inches from the walls and windows ?

Well, that's true.  But I do think that a prudent architect would foresee that you need some sort of room between a boundary and the wall of the structure.  But as Dean points out, this was probably a century ago, when people were more relaxed about space.

Permission has been granted by the local authorities, imo most probably because they are in cahoots with the local farmers...no doubt a case of not what you know but who you know.
The woman  who had the fence built doesn't even own the property...or the cows that have been  used for the reason to erect the fence so close to her neighbour.

Lord Foul wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:LOL
one missing trail camera too
Or a just Mask or cover
and deny deny deny

You must have lived a soft and sheltered life, if you think any of that is a problem

so then you meet several large fellows with ill intent...

you really need to grow up veya......

And??
you think i haven't meet large fellows with ill intent before.
AND I am A large fellow with ill intent, that grew up in one of the roughest areas of the country.
I have said before i was arrested but not convicted for 'threat to cause death or grievous bodily harm' when i was younger (19)
which was enough to see how the system really works. and it is not in the softies favor.

You need to get out from under that safety blanket you probably hid under your whole life.
I suspect i am younger but lived more than you.

I just think it's absurd that it went to court. The proper and decent thing to do is to consult the neighbours beforehand, and then come to some kind of compromise if a fence really does have to be erected. How can someone think it's fine to put a fence up a few inches away from someone's windows?