A retired couple watched on in dismay as CCTV showed them live footage of their neighbours ‘land-grabbing’ their garden whilst they were thousands of miles away in .
Rosa Bell, 67, and her husband Murray, 72, were horrified to see builders removing their boundary fence, digging up their patio and tearing down their shed all while they were visiting their daughter on the other side of the world.
The bitter dispute emerged when the Bells initially applied for an extension to the side of their three-bed Surrey home and raised concerns about their neighbours’ overhanging guttering.
This row escalated to new heights though when the couple were visiting their daughter who they had not seen since before the Covid-19 pandemic.
While away, their neighours, named in legal documents as Huy Eng and Michael Myers, claimed 1.2 metres at one end of their garden and 76 cm at the other.
Despite their protestations to both the local council and police, the Bells were unable to reclaim their land and were left pursuing the matter though civil court.
Both sets of neighbours have since received their own boundary surveys, with each suggesting different opinions on where the official lines are drawn.
These inconclusive findings are down to the property’s ‘crude’ deeds which originate back to the 1930s and fail to clearly portray the actual boundary lines of the house.
Mrs Bell has said that the couple failed in their court bid for damages but are still awaiting an official legal ruling on who owns the land.
Describing the ‘stressful situation’ she and her husband have had to endure, Mrs Bell said: ‘We both retired and bought this lovely house that was going to be our forever home.
‘But we have encountered such a nasty situation with the neighbours decided to move their boundary fencing to our property without an application to court or agreement with us.
‘We were away visiting our daughter in and could see them invading our property, cutting plants, trees, scrubs.
‘We have tried to do everything to rectify. We have had surveys done and spent a lot of money – but these people have just taken the law into their own hands.
‘There has been no consequences for them – they broke into our garden moved the shed and dumped everything in front of our kitchen patio doors.
‘I don’t understand. This is a living hell. Our only option seems to be spending a fortune on solicitor’s fees to fight it’.
Having bought what they thought would be their ‘forever home’ back in 2019 for £670k, the Bells did not encounter their neighbours until that first planning application for their extension was submitted.
That is when things went ‘sour’, according to Mrs Bell, who added that the couple’s trip Down Under had been ‘spoilt’ by the entire ordeal.
‘We saw everything they were doing on camera when we were on the other side of the world.
‘One day they would do one thing, then they would do something else. It was like they were teasing us knowing we were so far away’, Mrs Bell said.
Mrs Bell claimed that their neighbours began by taking down their boundary fence and cutting down all their trees and shrubs in December 2022.
Once the fence had been removed, contractors began ‘nibbling’ away at their garden and even carried out work under the cover of darkness.
An entire maple tree was cut and one man was seen on camera cutting her apple tree branches, with the new fence then erected by their neighbours attempting to claim their new boundary.
Four months later, the Bells responded by taking down the fence and building a new one on the previous boundary lines.
However, when the family were away that June, their neighbours struck once again and moved the fence back to their version of the boundary lines.
‘It is a lot of land. They claimed they had a boundary survey but a boundary surveyor does not give them the right or the power to move a boundary that has been in situ for more than 40 years’, Mrs Bell said.
‘They have to make an application to the court or have an agreement with us. There is neither. They claim their surveyor instructed them.
‘We’ve engaged solicitors and spent a lot of money already. On the original deeds it says our plot was 40ft at the back. She based everything on this. We’ve got several mappings and had surveys done that shows the plot spans out, equal into ours and theirs.
‘The very old deeds were before any property was built on the land. It just says there is 40ft at the back – and she said ‘that is all we are going to give you.’
‘Who takes a decision like that? Everything has been done when we are not in and they wait for us to go away.
‘The police or the council won’t get involved as it is a civil matter so we have to engage legal advice. They broke into our shed, dug up patios and left everything in such a mess. We could hardly walk out into the garden’.
Mrs Bell also claimed any efforts to resolve the situation amicably with the neighbours had fallen off deaf ears.
She added: ‘They won’t engage. We’ve tried mediation but they ignore everything, including letters from our solicitors. As far as they’re concerned they’ve done what they did and nothing happened to them.
‘What else can we do? I just feel our voice is not being heard.
‘We feel terribly frustrated and very sad about the whole situation. We just want to move now and get out of here but we can’t sell while this dispute is ongoing.’
Legal papers relating to the case state a claim that the original boundary fence had been ‘accepted by both parties to be the legal boundary’
The papers added that in September 2020 the Bells saw their application to build their new side extension granted and prior to commencing work they attempted to agree the position of the boundary.
They then received a report from surveyors in November 2020 but this was disputed by the Myers who obtained their own report which suggested alternative boundary lines.
The legal documents show the Myers then stated their intention to relocate the fence to the position in this report.
In December 2022 the Myers, through contractors, relocated the existing fence between the properties to align with their survey while the Bells were abroad and without their knowledge or permission, the papers state.
In May 2023 the Bells removed the Myers’ fence and erected a new fence in the position it was when they moved in.
In June 2023, again while the Bells were abroad, the Myers removed that new fence and relocated it. Plants were again dug up and the shed was relocated.
The report also made reference to original documents and title plans from the 1930s but described these as ‘crude’ and ‘inconclusive.
It added: ‘As is common, the people who drew up the historic plans did not produce plans that one might expect today.
‘What one can say is that these crude plans are very unlikely to be determinative of the boundary issue in any case.’
Mrs Bell said they sought legal advice but lost a claim in the county court for damages, although she said this had nothing to do with the boundary itself.
When approached, Huy Eng Myers, known as Victoria, who moved into the property in with husband Michael in April 2018, declined to comment on the dispute.
But she claimed they had been the ones who had been ‘harassed’ and reiterated they had ‘won a court’ ruling on the claim for damages.