Having at last found out how to link a previous post, here is a link to a post on Nov 2010 when the community were being asked by the council, what to do to save money.
Midlothian Cuts and More Hamlet!
If you can't be bothered clicking the link and reading the whole post, this is the most relevant section.....as far as recent matters at water tower wood are concerned.
At community council on Monday 22nd I requested time to put forward my case from the public side of the meeting. It went like this.
"Having heard the passionate pleas from a very stressed Head of Midlothian for budget cuts, I want this community to be aware of the possible waste of money in dealing with petty issues regarding our house build this last year". I went on to explain the possible costs as above. I then cited a number of examples -
1. Checking the legality of a perceived Right of Way - twice in 1998 and again in 2009. This had a cost. Quite a bit of paperwork was generated on this issue - not to mention the character assassination that followed when we were accused of closing the public footpath down to Ironmills.
Then there is an earlier post in Oct 2010 that records some useful information I think the events of a couple of days ago may be related to. Proof That Land Was Advertised For Sale worth a read if you think that somehow we came to acquire the land around 2 sides of the tennis court "illegally" or without any advertisement by the council.
In 2010 it was clear that a so called community group which called itself the Eskbank Amenity Society, with a constitution that documented their desire to foster good community relations, felt the need to become legal-eagles with regards to water tower wood, and lobbied the council for infringement of no build burdens by myself. I'm sure that at the time the community group were exploring some degree of corruption on my part because they seemed very keen to find some legal impropriety. They didn't find any, because there was none to find.
Below is an extract from an article from the internet, on land burdens. A no build burden is anything from a Wendy House to a power station. They cannot be unreasonably enforced. There are many papers documenting Scottish Land Burdens and you will need a law degree to be able to appreciate the scope and litigation surrounding burdens.
I have read them because they are quite fascinating to someone with a scientific mind.
The council should have read them.
If you are interested I can send you more links to legal process around land burdens, it is a fascinating subject; maritime burdens are interesting, then there are burdens that precent people keeping hens and pigs, there may even be some that prevent folks putting out a washing line.
E mail me on susangoldwyre@gmail.com if you want to know any more.
Scotland - Real burdens
The concept of restrictive covenants does not exist in this sense within the Scottish legal system. The Scottish equivalent is a real burden, which is a type of title condition.
A real burden is an obligation on an owner of land (the owner of the 'burdened property') either to do something or to avoid doing something, for example not to build an extension. It will be enforceable by the owners of 'benefited properties' and the presence of a real burden can sometimes, but not always, be found by an examination of one's title deeds. The law here is very complex and legal advice should be sought when determining whether a real burden exists.
Real burdens come in a variety of types, but are most commonly found in cases of plot subdivision or as 'community real burdens' where a developer has bought a large plot of land, built an estate on it, and then sold off the individual plots. Real burdens can be extinguished in a number of ways, including
- By agreement
- By the Lands Tribunal of Scotland
- By breach – if a) the owners of any benefited properties acquiesce by not objecting, or b) no-one has an interest to enforce the burden, or c) a number of years pass – this is called 'prescription'.
Real burdens can be difficult to enforce. The main problem is that, while they are required to be registered on the title of the property which is burdened, there is no requirement for them to be registered on the title of the property benefiting. This means that a person can hold enforcement rights without realising it, and so will not take the necessary steps if the burdens come to be breached. There is a notification procedure if one wishes to get the agreement of one's neighbours to breach a community real burden. This involves notifying all the owners of properties within a given area of one's intentions.
No comments:
Post a Comment