A very interesting dispute has arisen reference 'vehicular access' whereby
someone is 'digging' into a neighbours hedge and removing much of the
thickness, which in turn has killed it, to have 'VA' to his back garden via
a narrow footpath between two properties. This narrow footpath 'can' be
stretched to 3 metres wide using the verges and does have VA to an
Electricity Board sub station, but there is a padlocked pillar to keep all
and sundry from driving down. This person has a key for 'occasional V A' to
get to his rear garden. He is playing on the "3 metre rule" whereby with 3
metres available, even over this public footpath, he can have 24 hour
access.

Question.

Is this "3 metre rule" a standard norm and can he play on it?

If not, what is the normal and varied access width around the country?

Mike

--
H.M.S.Collingwood Ass. Llandudno 20 - 23 May Trip to Portmeirion
National Service (RAF) Ass. Cosford 24 - 27 June Spitfire Fly Past
H.M.S.Impregnable Ass. Sussex 1 - 4 July Visit to Int. Fest of the Sea
RAF Regiment Assoc. Scarborough 2 - 5 Sept. Visit to Eden Camp

In article , Mike
writes
A very interesting dispute has arisen reference 'vehicular access' whereby
someone is 'digging' into a neighbours hedge and removing much of the
thickness, which in turn has killed it, to have 'VA' to his back garden via
a narrow footpath between two properties. This narrow footpath 'can' be
stretched to 3 metres wide using the verges and does have VA to an
Electricity Board sub station, but there is a padlocked pillar to keep all
and sundry from driving down. This person has a key for 'occasional V A' to
get to his rear garden. He is playing on the "3 metre rule" whereby with 3
metres available, even over this public footpath, he can have 24 hour
access.

Question.

Is this "3 metre rule" a standard norm and can he play on it?

If not, what is the normal and varied access width around the country?


Vehicular access is not legally permitted on public footpaths.
If the Electricity Board have vehicular access to it, the path will be a
private carriageway for their own use only.

Statutory widths of Public Rights of Way unless otherwise recorded a
Footpath: 1 metre across a field; 1.5 metres at field edge.
Bridleway: 2 metres across a field; 3 metres at field edge.
Other Rights of Way: 3 metres across a field; 5 metres at field edge.

At the time of the 1770s Inclosures Act, foot roads were 'awarded' 60
feet wide between their hedges, but laws have changed since then.

Your 'someone' would do well to seek legal advice.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

In article ,
Alan Gould wrote:

Vehicular access is not legally permitted on public footpaths.
If the Electricity Board have vehicular access to it, the path will be a
private carriageway for their own use only.

That is not true.

Most 'public footpaths' are actually rights of way, not highways
for the use of pedestrians only. The landowner can grant more or
less any vehicular access he wishes.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Vehicular access is not legally permitted on public footpaths.
If the Electricity Board have vehicular access to it, the path will be a
private carriageway for their own use only.

No, it is a Public Footpath, but because of this dispute, I believe that
plans are in motion for them to have access via another way (through the car
park of some flats) so that a fixed barrier can be put in place on the
footpath.


Statutory widths of Public Rights of Way unless otherwise recorded a
Footpath: 1 metre across a field; 1.5 metres at field edge.
Bridleway: 2 metres across a field; 3 metres at field edge.
Other Rights of Way: 3 metres across a field; 5 metres at field edge.

So this '3 metre' thing is about :-)


At the time of the 1770s Inclosures Act, foot roads were 'awarded' 60
feet wide between their hedges, but laws have changed since then.

Your 'someone' would do well to seek legal advice.

I think that it has gone to Court, but not sure.
As a Councillor my hands are tied as to what I can do, but I will not be
standing for re-election and can fight this as an individual for the people
involved. As a councillor I cannot write a threatening letter, as a citizen
I can :-))

Thanks Alan & Joan, you have been a great help.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

Mike - Isle of Wight :-)

"Mike" wrote in message
...
As a Councillor my hands are tied as to what I can do, but I will not be
standing for re-election and can fight this as an individual for the
people
involved. As a councillor I cannot write a threatening letter, as a
citizen
I can :-))

Is that so? really?

What are the rules then?

I ask because a councillor sent me a threatening letter - I disagreed with
him over something and he didn't like it and wanted me shut up - and I was
told he could what he liked and being a councillor didn't affect his
personal rights.

It was sometime ago now and I am not going to drag it up but I would like to
know the rules.

...
As a Councillor my hands are tied as to what I can do, but I will not be
standing for re-election and can fight this as an individual for the
people
involved. As a councillor I cannot write a threatening letter, as a
citizen
I can :-))

Is that so? really?

What are the rules then?

I ask because a councillor sent me a threatening letter - I disagreed
with
him over something and he didn't like it and wanted me shut up - and I was
told he could what he liked and being a councillor didn't affect his
personal rights.

It was sometime ago now and I am not going to drag it up but I would like
to
know the rules.



As a Councillor, if I want something doing, it has to go through the proper
channels and the Clerk has to take it from there in letter form and the
outcome is final, 'to a certain degree'.

I can only quote what I have done as a private citizen and the way I did it
got the job done. Through the council and 'flannel'

Rather appropriate I suppose, but our village 'Lake' has a flooding problem.
Not so funny when you realise that the pair of houses opposite me flooded to
above skirting board level 4 times between 1986 when I moved in and the last
time, September 2003. The problems were twofold. !) So much building has
gone on that the drains cannot cope in a downpour and 2) the camber of a
junction was such, that when the drains flooded, the only place for the
water to go was down a drive and into the pair of houses via air bricks and
hollow floors.

On the last occasion I videoed the water and made the Highways and the Water
Department sit in my lounge, watch the video, and explain to them what they
had to do to alleviate the problem again. Meanwhile I was opposing any
building applications which were new builds on virgin ground because this
would have meant diverting more water to the drains. At the bottom of the
letter I wrote something to the effect that if Planning Department gave
planning consent after my warning, then any further flooding of these houses
would be down to the Council's negligence and that the owners would receive
my backing in suing the Council. I stopped two blocks of flats and the sale
of a field for bungalows

I had lots of planning applications turned down and the road surface
altered. The main drain in the village has also been given some form of
treatment. At the last downpour, the water ran away, 'away' from the houses
which had flooded in the past.

Another example of 'citizen power' over Councillor power was with the Gas
board. They were for ever repairing the old gas main. The road was
resurfaced in 1990, by the year 2000 we had 13 patches/repairs in 140
metres. I asked the men why a new main was not being put in. 'No money'.
Repairs and maintenance are a different budget.

I wrote to the Gas board and pointed out that their men had told me that the
leaking gas got into the drains, and were they aware that at the top of the
road is an underpass going under the Electric Train, and were they aware
that just 7 feet above the drain, was the train electric supply pick up
which often sparked. "Is this not a disaster waiting to happen?" Copied to
the Rail Company. A new 140 metre gas main was fitted the following week

I could not have done that as a Councillor, it would have had to go via the
Clerk and I don't think the rest of the councillors would have agreed with
my tone. Besides that, as they only meet once a month, you will see that
anything up to 3 months could go on just exchanging letters :-((

But I get the things done and the neighbours thank me for it :-)).

Without knowing the circumstances, I don't think that the councillor is in
his right to write a threatening letter to an individual. Corporation yes,
but not to you.

Hope that helps, sorry it is long

Mike

"Mike" wrote in message
...

...

Without knowing the circumstances, I don't think that the councillor is in
his right to write a threatening letter to an individual. Corporation yes,
but not to you.

Hope that helps, sorry it is long

Thanks for the information, my issue was nothing so grand which is why I was
amazed and actually intimmidated when he wrote to me!

However, as i said, I am not dragging it up, not least of all because the
same bloke actually " retired" from being a councillor under odd
circumstances anyway - word had it he was a till diddler in his local
consituency club!

In article , Mike
writes
No, it is a Public Footpath, but because of this dispute, I believe that
plans are in motion for them to have access via another way (through the car
park of some flats) so that a fixed barrier can be put in place on the
footpath.
Such a barrier would be a stile which allows foot but not vehicular
traffic. Modern stiles have swing gates to enable passage through
without having to cock a leg over as with the older crossover types.


Statutory widths of Public Rights of Way unless otherwise recorded a
Footpath: 1 metre across a field; 1.5 metres at field edge.
Bridleway: 2 metres across a field; 3 metres at field edge.
Other Rights of Way: 3 metres across a field; 5 metres at field edge.

So this '3 metre' thing is about :-)
It is about a Public Right of Way (PROW) across which certain vehicles,
(usually farm vehicles) have been given permission to travel. Such paths
have evolved out of Public and Private Carriageways 'awarded' during the
Inclosures of Commons in the 1700s. Any legal action about them is
protracted and complicated because all PROWs are protected by Act of
Parliament.

--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

In article , Mike
writes

Vehicular access is not legally permitted on public footpaths.
If the Electricity Board have vehicular access to it, the path will be a
private carriageway for their own use only.

No, it is a Public Footpath, but because of this dispute, I believe that
plans are in motion for them to have access via another way (through the car
park of some flats) so that a fixed barrier can be put in place on the
footpath.


Statutory widths of Public Rights of Way unless otherwise recorded a
Footpath: 1 metre across a field; 1.5 metres at field edge.
Bridleway: 2 metres across a field; 3 metres at field edge.
Other Rights of Way: 3 metres across a field; 5 metres at field edge.

So this '3 metre' thing is about :-)


At the time of the 1770s Inclosures Act, foot roads were 'awarded' 60
feet wide between their hedges, but laws have changed since then.

Your 'someone' would do well to seek legal advice.

I think that it has gone to Court, but not sure.
As a Councillor my hands are tied as to what I can do, but I will not be
standing for re-election and can fight this as an individual for the people
involved. As a councillor I cannot write a threatening letter, as a citizen
I can :-))

This is nonsense, you write the letter clearly as an individual it
doesn't matter whether you are a councillor or not, the only time you
would have a problem is if you were writing from your position *as* a
councillor when the matter is not a council issue, I have fought many
battles both as an individual and as a councillor and have not had a
problem distinguishing between the two.


Thanks Alan & Joan, you have been a great help.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

Mike - Isle of Wight :-)



--
David