Boundary dispute, trespass and damage

The owner of title GR229038 claims that he owns a chunk of GR214669 and has demolished a hedge and a ditch between the two titles. Police were called and after speaking to us went over to speak to him telling us that it constituted trespass and criminal damage.Damage to (this type of) hedgerow is a criminal offence as per DEFRA guidelines, but they don't seem interested in that.

The owner of title GR229038 showed the police a document on his solicitor's headed paper which, he said, "proves" he owned (some of) the land in GR214669. On that basis the police didn't arrest him and told us that it was a civil matter and nothing to do with them. They said that if we could prove that we owned GR214669 then they would revisit the case.

On hearing this I obtained a title plan and summary of title for each of GR214667/8/9 and GR229038. All of these documents show that the boundary has not changed since 1999. I submitted a detailed report with all these plans attached, along with a planning document that the owner of title GR229038 submitted in 2021, which also shows the boundary as per the LR docs. We have the TP1 which created GR229038 and that shows the same boundary. 

The police are now saying that "the  document [we supplied] showing the boundary" is "two years old" (they are all less than two weeks old) and the neighbour's document, dated some time in 2022 (not seen by us, nor supplied to us by his solicitor when requested) trumps the LR docs. I do not understand this.

The police maintain it is a civil matter and have told us to go to court to prove ownership. I believe this will take months.

My questions are:

* Do LR docs actually *prove* ownership, as I believe they do?

If so, why are the police stalling? As well as a contract of sale, which does not exist and cannot be produced by the neighbour, I believe that a TP1 and a new title would be needed for the neighbour to claim ownership? I would ask the police to ask the neighbour for these, but they value his one page document above the LR documents.

* How can I search for the existence of a TP1 out of GR214669?

I can see that there were no changes to the GR214669 as of the end of November but I cannot see how to search for a TP1. Of course it would be much easier for the police to ask the neighbour to provide copies of the relevant paperwork than it is for us to prove its non-existence, but that is effectively what the police want us to do before looking into it further. Frustrating.

Thanks in advance,
Martin 

Martin - in my experience such matters are only resolved between neighbours.
The registered information confirms legal ownership of land/property but the Police don't generally get involved in boundary disputes unless criminal acts have taken place such as assault
If neighbours can't resolve matters then the sole arbiter is a court of law and they can sit in judgement as appropriate. The legal system tries to keep such matters out of the courts and may well recommend a mediation process aimed at trying to resolve matters legally but without tying up the full court's time
There's been no 'TP out of GR214669' since the title itself was created in 1999
If you want to check and confirm what documents are available re each title then please use the contact form as appropriate. The support team can then check and confirm and explain how to apply by post for copies of anything you may be missing
 

Adam - thanks for the fast response and for confirming that nothing has been transferred out. I spoke to an ex DS last night and he said the police/CPS automatically deem anything involving land to be "civil" to avoid having to deal with it. I can see why they might do that, but I can't see why they want us to go to court to prove ownership when we've presented proof of ownership from you. I'll feed this back to them.

Take care.

Martin - that would be my experience based solely on information shared by similar enquiries. The Police aren't there to assess and judge the legal nuances here so if it's two disputing neighbours it's a matter for the courts and not the police