A WIDOW has been locked in a fight with her neighbours for 20 YEARS after claiming their fence crossed into her property.
The long-standing feud has racked up an eye-watering £100,000 in legal fees and two decades of bad blood which Judge Alan Johns has said “brought misery to her as well as to her neighbours.”
5
5
5
Norma Yozin-Smith, 73, claimed the fence between her house in New Barnet and neighbours Anthony and Julie Alexander strayed into her garden.
The widow alleged that the fence violated a boundary line tepidly agreed upon by both parties in 2002.
In 2007, both sides enlisted a surveyor who spoke to the respective households and prepared a final letter – before marking out the boundary.
Soon afterwards, the Alexanders put up the new fence along part of the new boundary line.
The couple assumed a compromise had been fairly reached.
However, Yozin-Smith sued the couple, citing a violation of the recommendation made by the surveyor.
She argued that the couple hadn’t followed the prescriptions – resulting in her trees and plants ending up in her neighbour’s garden.
The couple have denied that accusation.
Most read in Property
Judge Alan Johns has since thrown out Mrs Yozin-Smith’s case.
Giving his ruling, the Judge said: “All domestic boundary disputes are regrettable, but this one is more regrettable than most.
“It continues despite having already been resolved by a boundary agreement as long as 15 years ago when both sides agreed to be bound by the determination of their shared boundary by a surveyor – who set out his views on the boundary in a report on 9 February 2007 revised by a letter on February 15.”
He went on to rule that the marked out boundary line faithfully reflected the surveyor’s report, adding: “I reject entirely her case that the line marked out on the ground failed to reflect the report of 9th February.
“It follows that the agreed boundary line is represented by the line marked on the surveyor’s digital plan.”
However Judge Johns went on to find that part of the Alexanders’ fence was leaning into Mrs Yozin-Smith’s garden due to dilapidation.
He conceded: “I find that there is a nuisance by encroachment to the extent of half the width of some of the posts”.
While refusing to order an injunction against the Alexanders and ordering them to modify the fence, Judge Johns said Mrs Yozin-Smith should be entitled to a compensatory sum.
He concluded: “I have in mind an award of £500.”
5
5
This post first appeared on thesun.co.uk
