Neighbouring pensioners have spent £121,000 on an 10-year-row over a piece of land less than a metre wide.
Great-grandparents Annette and Raymond Timmins have “fallen into depression” ever since they squandered their life savings on the legal battle over the 76cm space.
The couple have been arguing with neighbour Alan Soden, 85, over a gate at the back of their neighbour’s house, which opens on to their parking area.
Mr Soden threatened to take the couple to the High Court when his tenants complained the elderly pair were blocking the back gate with their car.
Outraged Mr and Mrs Timmins, aged 74 and 73, responded by erecting a fence blocking Mr Soden’s gate – so he took them to court.
He successfully claimed he had right of way over THEIR parking space because he’d been using it before they moved in to their bungalow in Maidenhead in 2004.
The tribunal judge awarded him a 76cm wide right of way through their space.
But the 11-year argument cost Mr Soden a staggering £76,000 – and the Timmins have been ordered to pay £27,000 towards his costs, as well as their own £45,000 legal bill.
The great-grandparents-of-ten dipped into what’s left of Raymond’s private pension and personal savings in order to pay the huge sum.
Read More
Top Stories from Mirror Online
-
Hurricane Helene heading to UK
-
Inside Kim’s North Korea
-
Terror victim’s boyfriend’s agony
-
Spray-painted homeless man dies
Now Annette and her disabled husband, claim they could be taken to court for parking on their own space – and have been left "penniless" by the court case.
Devastated Annette said: "I’ve spent almost everything I have. It cost me everything. We’re now in depression.
"We just can’t believe this has happened. I have been parking on my land.
"But now I can be sued for parking on that 76cm space. He claimed he had a right of way and he won.
"If I could afford to challenge the decision then I would, but we’ve been left with nothing."
The Sodens, 85-year-old Alan and 78-year-old Vivien, bought their home in 1987 and have rented it out since.
Meanwhile the Timmins’, who both worked in the retail industry before retirement, bought a bungalow in the same street in 2004.
Both homes have their own parking spaces in a shared residential car park, about 100m from Annette’s house, and backs onto the garden of Mr Soden’s property.
His gate opens on to her 4m side parking space, and his tenant’s used the exit to get out and on to the public road – instead of walking the ‘long way round’ from the front door.
Documents from the first tier land registry tribunal at the property chamber in Alfred Place, London, say they began arguing about the access in 2005 or 2007.
But things deteriorated in February 2015 when a tenant living at Mr Soden’s left a note on Annette’s car.
The note read "please don’t block our gate. I don’t want to scratch your car with my bike".
A frustrated Annette, responded to explain that the land is in fact her property, but court papers explain how the relationship between households "rapidly" deteriorated.
Both sides enlisted solicitors who fired letters back and forth, and in September 2015 Annette and her husband put up a FENCE over the gate.
"Ray told me to give it up but I wouldn’t", said Annette.
She added: "I didn’t see how we could lose and I thought it would be right to fight for what is ours.
"How it ended was devastating for us. I feel completely let down.
"It has had a terrible impact on us emotionally."
A year later, in May 2016, Mr Soden applied to the Land Registry for right of way – or easement – over Annette’s car parking space, because he’d been using it for 20 years.
The Timmins’ objected – landing the argument in a tribunal court on January 2017.
But the tribunal judge Mr William Hansen agreed they have been walking over her parking space since 1988 – more than the required 20 years – and awarded him right of way.
He now has access to a 76cm wide strip of land from his gate, across her spot and the car park, to the middle of a nearby public road.
Mr Hansen ordered her to pay £27,500 towards Mr Soden’s legal costs, who shelled out £76,000 on 135 hours of legal help.
The Timmins’ also paid £45,000 to solicitors, meaning the battle cost them over £72,000.
A hearing in June this year gave her until last month to pay up, and the Timmins’ spent almost all of the private investment funds, pensions and personal savings on the case.
Now if Annette parks anywhere in the 76cm strip of land, Mr Soden could take her to court, she claims.
Speaking to the Mail on Sunday, Mr Soden, who lives in a five-bedroomed home in the nearby village of Cookham, said: "I knew I was in the right, that is why I would not give up,.
"But yes, I admit there is no real sense of victory and the only people who have really won out of all this are the expensive lawyers.
"The money it has cost us is ridiculous when you look at what we were fighting over."
Annette says she now "hates living here", having moved to the area from Scotland in order to be closer to family.
She said: "I hate this house. I hate living here.
"I wish I never left Scotland. It has caused us an unbelievable amount of stress.
"I have always been a good neighbour.
"Before this I’ve never had an argument with a neighbour like this."
Tens of thousands of pounds out of pocket, Annette admits that she "regrets" putting her life’s savings on the line in the hope of winning the court case.
She said: "We’ve been left with absolutely nothing now. I regret it all because I’ve lost everything.
"It was devastating to lose like we did.
"If I had enough money left then we would appeal, but we just can’t afford to."
As part of the civil court ruling, Annette was ordered to remove the barrier too.
In summarising his findings, tribunal judge Mr Hansen, said: "I am satisfied that the applicant (Mr Soden), and his wife during the period of their ownership and his tenants have openly and continuously used the way as claimed and had done so for a least 20 years.
"The Chief Land Registrar is to alter the register is respect of the applicants property, its parking space and garage, to record that it has the benefit of a right of way without motorised vehicle at all times and for all purposes."
Source: Read Full Article