Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Public Right of way.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5520 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Not sure if this goes here.

 

Does anyone know if a land owner can stop someone using a right of way over their land. And what is the best way to check it is a public right of way first lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would be best of checking with the local council.

 

On a more personal opinion, I would also look at whether it is reasonable to use the right of way given the circumstances. Some people seem to think that just because it is there it should be used. I'm sure I remember one case where a right of way went through someone's garden (and I think the actual house), and ramblers were pestering the homeowner to pass through, despite there being a perfectly good pass just a few meters away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The local Highway Authority - usually the County Council or Unitary, keeps the Definitive Map and Statement of public rights of way. Ask for the PRoW Officer. The route may only be permissive - permission given by the owner to the use of the way. Generally though, the land owner can not stop its use by the public. However, it depends on the type of route, if you were cycling on a footpath then he can stop you, etc. Speak to the PRoW about the particular instance, see what they say.

 

Regards,

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also look at whether it is reasonable to use the right of way given the circumstances.

Reasonableness is irrelevant. Its called a right of way for a reason

Some people seem to think that just because it is there it should be used.
They're quite right.

I'm sure I remember one case where a right of way went through someone's garden (and I think the actual house), and ramblers were pestering the homeowner to pass through, despite there being a perfectly good pass just a few meters away.
If someone's built a house on a right of way then it's their own stupid fault. The ramblers are perfectly correct to demand to use it - it's their right. If they were to go a different way to avoid the house they would be trespassing (unless the other way is also a right of way).

 

It annoys the hell out of me when, 4 1/2 miles into a 5 mile walk I find that some land owner that shares your attitude has decided to put a fence across the path I'm legally following.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on -don't bite my head off! I'm all for rights of way and maintaining public spaces.

 

The scenario I referred to was a property built some time ago and purchased by an unwitting person. It was discovered as being on a right of way some time afterwards by ramblers. At that point, rather than use the path that they had used previously, they started demanding to go through the property. Why? To me something like that is doing it for the sake of it. If I were that homeowner I'd be doing some serious head banging - theirs, not mine.

 

If someone discovered a right of way through your living room, would you be happy with all and sundry coming and going as they pleased? Think it would be a different matter then.

 

If it is a case of open field with a footpath that has regularly been used, and the land owner arbitarily cuts off the pathway, then that is a different matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone's built a house on a right of way then it's their own stupid fault.

 

It would be more commonplace to divert the PRoW I believe. Although, as Gymo has said, some do pass through gardens.

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick look at the OS Maps on www.fixmystreet.co.uk will prove whether there is an ESTABLISHED right of way that is fully recognised (and protected). This isn;t the same as a 'footpath' which may be shown but is not a RoW. All councils hold defitinive maps to take this a stage further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The scenario I referred to was a property built some time ago and purchased by an unwitting person. It was discovered as being on a right of way some time afterwards by ramblers. At that point, rather than use the path that they had used previously, they started demanding to go through the property. Why? To me something like that is doing it for the sake of it. If I were that homeowner I'd be doing some serious head banging - theirs, not mine.

If the only reason they were demanding to follow the right of way was simply to cause grief then I agree. I don't know the case you're talking about but maybe the owner of the land they had been using to get round the house had objected and put a fence there? Or a vicious dog/bull/other dangerous animal

 

If someone discovered a right of way through your living room, would you be happy with all and sundry coming and going as they pleased? Think it would be a different matter then.

Absolutely not. I think I'd put a path round the boundary of my land then apply to the council to divert the right of way along the new path. I'd also sue my solicitor to kingdom come

 

If it is a case of open field with a footpath that has regularly been used, and the land owner arbitarily cuts off the pathway, then that is a different matter.

I've come across it a few times (not many admittedly) but what I was thinking of was a path that went through someones garden right next to the house. The owner had put a solid wooden fence across the path and a sign saying "Private Property. Keep Out. No public Right of Way". When I confronted him he admitted the path went across the garden, let me in the gate and claimed the fence was just to stop his horse escaping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely not. I think I'd put a path round the boundary of my land then apply to the council to divert the right of way along the new path. I'd also sue my solicitor to kingdom come

 

But you are happy enough to trample over other people's land:-? That really is a case of NIMBY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to trample along rights of way, as is my right, regardless of who owns the land. What's NIMBY about it? I've told you that I'd let people cross my land if there was a right of way there. (Not that I own any land)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring the legalities for a moment, I look at all these things on the basis of treat others how you wish to be treated.

 

I think it generally works.

 

On the legalities side I believe you can apply to have a ROW diverted if there is an adjacent alternative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replys. I feel now I should put a little more info. The land owner is my boss, I had an accident at work going in on my bike. I claimed as it was his fault, because of the state of his traffic routes. So he has banned me from going in on my bike. But the route to his factory is a right of way.From the right of way, you go right to the factory and straight on for 3 miles to follow the right of way, as far as anyone knows.If he is right to stop me, is it right he can do so out of my working hours?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah. so the issue is about the maintenance of the ROW.

 

An owner of a ROW is obligated to maintain a ROW if he starts doing so. If he does not then he is not.

 

Another issue, maybe more relevant is the occupiers liability act; it seems to me that you had a licence to use the path.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah. so the issue is about the maintenance of the ROW.

 

An owner of a ROW is obligated to maintain a ROW if he starts doing so. If he does not then he is not.

 

Another issue, maybe more relevant is the occupiers liability act; it seems to me that you had a licence to use the path.

 

The owner of the land that a PUBLIC RoW exists only has to maintain it to the level required for that Public RoW - ie footpath = foot traffic only, bridleway = surface required for ped,cyclist,horse. Sometimes the highway authority has maintainance responsibilties.

 

Eggy,

Is your bike a motorcycle?

 

John

Edited by johnhowell
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...