NETWORK RAIL ARE DISHONEST WHEN THEY SAY THEY OWN OUR DRIVEWAY 😳😲😦😧

[@ALTNABREAC]

We really appreciate your support in which any form it comes, thank you 👍. The GofundMe is for legal support as described here: www.gofundme.com/f/588854-altnabreac-cover-up

[@EricMoxey-vl2qf]

Hi why when they had a meeting about your land ,by all parties and they did not invited you ! This is very interesting. Showing the line draw against yourselves.

[@ALTNABREAC]

@@EricMoxey-vl2qf Thanks for noticing that, and that is correct that they did not invite us to any of the meetings

[@Steve-lb9qk]

Well done for explaining the situation for the newer followers. You guys are very brave. Expect the need to explain it all over again to the newbies in the future.

[@adif7542]

The only fixed point on your land that is considered in lawfully correct is a Benchmark. There are three types of Benchmark, I suspect because there is a railway station on your land there will be at least two Permanent Benchmarks. For a measurement to be considered legal evidence it must be taken from the Bench Mark. Your whole property, the property boundaries and rights of ways will have been survey using a Benchmark. The Benchmarks on your land can prove the extent of your land and will confirm your property deeds. Types of Benchmarks: - Permanent Benchmarks: These are fixed and durable, often marked by metal discs, pillars, or structures set into the ground. They are commonly found in public spaces like roadsides or buildings. - Temporary Benchmarks (TBM): These are less permanent reference points set during a specific survey for a temporary period. - Arbitrary Benchmarks: These are reference points whose elevation is not necessarily tied to sea level or other geodetic references but are assigned an arbitrary elevation for convenience. Legal Relevance of Benchmarks in Surveying: - Accurate Land and Property Boundaries: Benchmarks provide a precise and official reference for determining land elevations, which is critical for establishing property boundaries, assessing land values, and preventing disputes. - Construction and Engineering Projects: Legal compliance in major construction projects requires adherence to accurate elevation data. Benchmarks are essential for ensuring that buildings, roads, bridges, and other structures are built to specified heights and gradients. - Floodplain Mapping and Zoning: Benchmarks are critical for flood risk assessments and defining floodplain boundaries. This information is legally significant in zoning regulations and insurance considerations. - Legal Documentation and Dispute Resolution: Surveyed elevations based on benchmarks may be submitted in court cases involving boundary disputes, land claims, or development issues. The legal system relies on these accurate and stable points for evidence. - Government and Municipal Regulations: Many local governments set laws and standards based on benchmarks for public works, land development, and environmental protection. Surveyors are often legally required to reference these official benchmarks in their reports. - Impact on Land Titles and Transactions: In land surveying, benchmarks are fundamental in certifying the accuracy of property descriptions during real estate transactions. These ensure that titles, deeds, and contracts reflect precise and legally recognized measurements. In summary, benchmarks in surveying provide the foundation for legal precision in land elevation measurement, boundary definitions, construction standards, and compliance with municipal, zoning, and environmental laws. You and Network Rail can make what ever claims you like. However, claims mean absolutely nothing. Your property deeds are worthless scraps of paper, until measurements have been taken from the Benchmarks to verify the extent of the bounder. A Judge or Sheriff will not rule on a boundary despite until a survey has been completed. My advice and I hope any solicitors advise would be to get a survey done by a reputable company.

[@Voting-does-nothing]

​@@ALTNABREACget a life

[@stuartwooldridge1551]

This would all be resolved with less than an hour court time. No one except an expert knows who would win. Get it sorted with legal representation and then move on with your lives. You are currently in limbo and this will consume you. You need a judgement in court.

[@austinlloyd9757]

@stuartwooldridge1551 I think their looking for a pay cheque, then they will be content lol

[@thorgrimb2416]

​@@austinlloyd9757 if it is their land which from what we have seen over numerous videos then their day in court will result in a payday for them but this is the problem big companies don't give a damn about others rights or ownership and they would rather spend tens of thousands to beat people down when it could have been resolved for a fraction of the cost. Their egos are to big to accept they need consent they think they are entitled to do whatever they want.

[@nobbybrown8056]

My take on it is:- you do own the land that the ''drive' is on from the cattle grid to past your house, but, NR have access rights to cross the land for any work they need to carry out. From the map at the end of the video, you do not own the washing line area or the area/woodland where the new path has been put, you can clearly see your land stops at the eastern side of the drive on your land. If it was my land I would keep quiet and encourage pedestrians to use the new path, for more privacy. I believe you may be getting slightly mixed up with land ownership and access rights. As the land owner I would like to see documents proving NR access across your land, but I think court is the place to prove that. Also a ground survey to prove extent of land ownership is a must before you slip up and claim land thar is not yours. Historical maps clearly show the pedestrian access on the route along your drive that you walked straight from the cattle grid to the platform. When your house was still in use as the Station, the land around it on the easter side, would of been used for railway access to the platform, I would be led to believe those rights of access still exist, that would be my point of investigation to prove one way or another. The reason I say all of this to you is not to say you are wrong, I as a previous rights of way officer are merely giving you my opinion so you can do your due diligence and protect yourselves.

[@SeanieVoiceOver]

I agree with the bulk of your posting, in Scotland there's a 7 year boundary rule for "Adverse possession" therefore if you enclose and maintain UNREGISTERED land you can apply for possession after 7 years (12 years in some cases) and acquire legal title What they seem to allude to in the video is that the compost bin in the Western boundary of the adjoining woodland (over their Eastern boundary) is "Their land" similarly the washing line area, both of which aren't included in the boundary of their title plan, so they may have obtained title to these two parcels of land IF they were previously unregistered and they proved adverse possession via enclosure and constant use over 12 or 7 years

[@postiepatman]

@@SeanieVoiceOver So they are just as bad a Network Rail..... Trying to claim land that they know, not to own...

[@SebastianPayne-h3x]

Those that shout the loudest have the biggest issue! Again you love the confrontation and arguing isn't going to fix it. You have the problem. Go to court Tat path looks good. You also have a public path through your land. They can access it. You bought land next to a train station that comes with it's own issues

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

We do not love confrontation. We love the truth and hate dishonesty. Speaking up against NR's unlawful actions against us is not confrontation, it's shining a light on tyranny by the corporates, police, governments against the public which is rampant in this world. We bought the land next to a railway and we love our property and land. What we will not allow is NR to try and take what is ours unlawfully. We explained the public right of way in the video which is a legal right of way for the public to the station which we have no issue and the public freely use this right of way regularly. NR, on the other hand, cannot access and use our land without the legal right to do so. In this situation, to resolve the issues, they need to obtain our permission through formal legal agreements. That is the law and how things should be done.

[@martinkelsen6049]

You have problems with your eyes, and your spelling. It is probably best you stay out of things that are way above you.

[@truthhurts7537]

Exactly, these people are out of their face NIBYS bought a station house next to a public station and railway, if Network Rail can't access their station and railway, then station gets closed and railway also gets closed. They have right of access, it doesn't matter who owns the driveway, it is a right of access established the same way as the Public Footpath was originally established (which I'm also sure these two aren't happy with as I've seen previous video's where they've padlocked the gate.

[@Euroscot9155]

Victimhood is an easier card to play.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

@@truthhurts7537 'They have a right of access'?! And you know because you've examined ALL the evidence and know the complete conveyancing history of the property! The public footpath is FOR THE PUBLIC and it is not for VEHICLES, PLANT, MACHINERY! The public freely use the access footpath over our land to get to the station and they are not prevented from using it because THE PUBLIC have a legal right to cross our land. NR do not have a LEGAL RIGHT to access and use our land WITHOUT OUR PERMISSION. You clearly are choosing to ignore the FACTS.

[@brojajacra]

Theres no point discussing this communication with network rail and trying too convunce us teh public. You need to do this in court. Ive looked at the title deed and see exactly where the problem is. the line drawing looks like the drive is outside your deed. however when its viewed with the satellite overlay the drive from the cattle grid (roughly where your chain is) shows the drive is clearly in your deed. The problem arises that for Infastructure needs people like network rail can access peoples property without permission such as the building of the path so they can avoid your property. You need to take this up in a court because it doesnt really matter what us viewers think

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

We are pursuing the proper civil process channels in dealing with this. These videos are to ensure that the public is given the facts and truth about what is happening here at Altnabreac to expose the wrongdoing of companies like Network Rail and the police. The mainstream will not report the facts....the mainstream were not interested to present our side to the situation because they push the narrative the companies and governments want them push. So this is what is known as 'citizen's journalism.'

[@manlycouncil2219]

The title mapping shows a road or planned road next to, but outside of, your property on the driveway side. Interestingly as you note this is where Network Rail have built the new access path to the platform. This title plan shows no access way from your gate to the platform, only across the site parallel to the platform (which you house was built over). Historically the access to the platform appears to have been intended to be via the noted road space on the title plan, which has been allowed to become overgrown, until the new path was installed. Its a bit weird they appear to run the new path from within your land. Note the title doc says you are obliged to maintain your land fenced and gated. As you will now understand, you need a surveyor and a solicitor to resolve this with Network Rail.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

@@manlycouncil2219 If you are referring to the white strip that runs alongside our eastern boundary out with the title, then this is overgrown woodland. That white strip is NOT a pathway/road. If you look at the aerial image of our plan on the cadastral map on ROS, you will see that the white strip is actually the woodland! You will also clearly see that the driveway IS within our registered title just like the surveyor confirmed. Anyone with eyes can see it! NR is deliberately using that white strip to mislead and dishonestly claim it is the driveway when it is NOT and they know it is not. Very crafty and very dishonest of them.

[@truthhurts7537]

The problem is not who owns the land but that Network Rail have right of access as its the only drive leading to their station and railway. The same if your neighbour owned the land connecting your driveway to your house, as it is considered "Right of Access" - otherwise there would be people all over the country disowning people of their property by claiming ownership of the access rights (which tens of thousands have!). At the end of the day Network Rail could also enforce a compulsorily Purchase order, it would be easier to just allow them to avoid a Railway disaster and un-necessary loss of life by allowing them access to their track and station! It's not as if they will be driving through every day, week or even month, they just need access as required to maintain their property and that's the key point "access to their property". Of course some Charter Surveyor is going to chime in, he can see the money signs... the reality is no one can block right of access to your land across an established drive or path used over time.

[@berniemcneill5178]

@@LizAltnabreac-u8h test your theory on other properties that you know, im confident you will see that it doesn’t line up with those boundaries either, try it. The reason it wont is that the satellite image is not likely to be one directly overhead it will be from an angle. Incidentally os maps are not as accurate as you think they are, we do sketch layouts overlaid on os but would never build off one for that would get a topographical survey.

[@impactvision]

How much do we bet on that pedestrian gate is normally chained and locked by the occupiers? The sign that says "please ring for attention" say's it all.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

Nope, there is no lock on the gate. Ask the cyclists that visited the station over the weekend 😃

[@ALTNABREAC]

@@Carlos-im3hn The pedestrian gate was there when we moved in and for quite a while before that. The gate and fence did fall apart whilst we have been here, because the posts were rotten. We were approached by a forestry worker last year asking us to fix it, because of Deer control.

[@privateprivate1830]

Yes it did have a padlock which you opened in one of your videos

[@jonpotter5536]

Network Rail has planning permission to re-instate the passenger waiting room, build an electronic signalling system, install a wi-fi mast and a solar powered plant room and associated cabling. This is the reason for the safe path to the platform. Two questions. Did you raise a planning objection to this development on "your" land? When Network Rail complete the upgrade do you believe that you will own this new infrastructure?

[@ib560]

They've tried to block the necessary work to re open the station every step of the way, but no doubt they'll be quite happy to use it, if it ever re opens.

[@ALTNABREAC]

We were never made aware of the planning application. They sent us a letter 5 days before coming, then we stopped them for the first time. It would not be lawful for Network Rail to build anything on our land without our permission.

[@jonpotter5536]

So in answer to the question, do you believe that the new waiting room, plant room, wi-fi mast & cabling that is going to be built at the station is on your land?

[@TheDigger06]

​@@ALTNABREACnot technically your land,,is it

[@nicksmith8557]

@jonpotter5536 good question that deserves a reply.

[@grayzly]

I'd personally be thanking network rail for putting a much more private walkway free of charge in for you, its been made very clear by you that pedestrians have access so I really don't see the problem, they have made it better for you? It all seems very petty, they only wanted the access only to make the pathway!!! Id like to add, NR has a duty to maintain a SAFE access for pedestrians, there was not safe route, So its the land onwers duty to do the right thing as well here and allow for this pathway. I really don't see the issue here. Get a life!

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

Please know that this new pathway was not constructed for the PUBLIC. The public already have a route to access the station over our land which is a legal right of way. NR do not have a legal right to access our land without our permission and they already know this but to to build this pathway, they falsely claimed to the BTP to own our driveway so they could get all they vehicles and machines on our land unlawfully to build it. They have acted totally unlawfully and NR is misleading the public. NR built this pathway for their workers and agents to access the station NOT the public. Members of the public were never blocked from using the public right of way and loads of people have visited when it was open and since it has been closed. All this about 'safe access' is NR misleading the public when all they needed to do was get our permission to access and use our land. That is why they could not access the station last year. It was NOTHING to do with 'being unable to 'safely access' the station. They could not access and use the station because they need our permission and if they get it, then things can progress. Very simple. PS: NR do not have any duty to maintain a public right of way. The public right of way is NOTHING to do with NR. Get it right!

[@brianjohnson5789]

@@LizAltnabreac-u8h if that path is only for railway workers, then it should clearly be signed as such, with appropriate barriers to stop members of the public accidentally using it. www.orr.gov.uk/media/10698/download etc shows the steps that should be taken, it seems unlikely they have been in this case.

[@tillybobs2]

He accepts pedestrian right of way, they drove over it. That is the issue,

[@joseph-ge5om]

as mentioned the Previous owner gave Net rail permission to use their drive they lost that authority when the current owner purchased the Drive with his Home I have seen the map of the survey and Distinctly shows the only access is the Public Footpath If Net Rail is so sure of their access, why did they build another Footpath to the station.

[@SeanieVoiceOver]

This is obviously an access route for a proposed 5G telecoms mast & Plant room that NR wish to construct on their station platform, a nice revenue earner for them and a potential health risk to local residents

[@postiepatman]

@@SeanieVoiceOver It's a seperate issue to access.

[@austinlloyd9757]

I think you should visit your solicitors as this is more than likely this is why it was sold and their search and all ,,,future infustructers would have been made aware to you 😮

[@indy-biker-stevie]

I believe that the only way this will be resolved is in court. I also mentioned in one of your previous vids that the railway has its own laws under the Railway act, which is very complicated for a lay person to understand, not only will you need to get a knowledgeable competent lawyer to deal with your case, you'll also need deep pockets to fight the case in court. As I have already mentioned previously, I work in the rail industry myself though not for NWR, so I'm not favoring one side over the other, but I will say that its not often NWR make this kind of mistake as they're normally well informed, thats why I said that the only way you can settle it is in a Scottish court of law. I also can't believe that this dispute has resulted in NWR & Scotrail suspended trains from stopping at Altnabreac station. that alone is a very unusual action.

[@stephenholmes1036]

If the passengers cannot access or egress a station safely NR must close the station. It happens now and then

[@stephenseagull4423]

Why don't you have a full boundary survey and have it legally marked

[@zedeyejoe]

According to The Times, Network Rail obtained an interim interdict to stop the couple from interfering with its work. BT and its subsidiary EE also followed suit and obtained interdicts after the couple blocked its workers from installing a 4G mast that was eventually set up with the aid of a helicopter.

[@TraceUK]

They’re building another route to try and resolve the matter without having to go through court proceedings. Like I said, it sounds like you BOTH own the road/driveway and have shared access. My house & my next door neighbour BOTH own our driveway until it meets the public highway and we have SHARED access. On my deeds, it shows that I own the driveway, on my neighbours, it shows that she owns it. However on each of the titles, it shows an easement giving shared access to the neighbour. Please google shared access.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

No, Network Rail DO NOT own our driveway. We own the entrance and entire driveway! They are falsely claiming to own ALL of our driveway. We have explained this clearly many times. The driveway and some of the cattle grid is wholly within our registered title CTH7726. It is indisputable that we own the driveway and Network Rail do not. If Network Rail owned our driveway like they're falsely claiming, then why have they built an entirely new route to the station.....I think the answer is obvious: they do NOT own our driveway and they have built a pathway on land they do not own! This is nothing to do with shared access rights. It is a dispute about land ownership.

[@clivewiddall3430]

Sounds like you are a supporter of land theft! Is it nice working for network rail?

[@DaveDukes-by6bl]

@@TraceUK at last somebody with some common sense, which is not very common on here.

[@joffey1212]

Great services railway on your doorstep,runway built by network rail

[@markgc65]

if you own it then the proof would get you an injunction in about 7 days. ​@LizAltnabreac-u8h

[@laughingboy279]

The aerial imagery has no standing in law. The surveyor should know that.

[@ALTNABREAC]

That's your own opinion. And this is the law: This difficulty is addressed, at least in part, by section 65(3) of the Land Registration etc. (Scotland) Act which provides that the Cadastral Map is not inaccurate where it shows something incorrectly by virtue of an inexactness in the Ordnance Map as long as it is within the published tolerances for the scale. In other words, the Cadastral Map cannot be more accurate than the Ordnance Map. What this means for understanding Land Register titles is that you must always take account of the scale of the underlying Ordnance Map when interpreting a Land Register title plan. "The Cadastral map cannot be more accurate than the ordnance map" Get it?

[@laughingboy279]

@@ALTNABREAC it's not opinion. It's fact. Unless you can provide a case where low quality satellite imagery was used to decide a case relating to only a few feet

[@ALTNABREAC]

@@laughingboy279 It's not low quality satellite imagery that ROS use, it's a high-quality ordnance map. I'm confident a Chartered Surveyor of nearly 40 years knows best. Unless you have higher credentials? is that what you are claiming?

[@laughingboy279]

@@ALTNABREAC I'm not referring to the map. That's my point. You need to concentrate on the map.

[@MuzzleMike]

Sadly I live in the States and the laws are not the same . From what I see is your land has been molested and this needs to be taken to court . I read in the comments that you are just looking for a check . I disagree! You are looking to stop the blatant molestation . Also you need to be made whole . As a land owner I do understand. I have removed people from my city that were trespassing. We are care takers and owners of the land . We have to keep on top things .

[@keithhooper6123]

Perhaps clarify as to why this was not sorted out before you purchased the property. If you are sure of your position ,Mark it,fence it,and say, "see you in court".

[@Euroscot9155]

I used to have a similar right of way clause whereby I was permitted to move my waste bins through my neighbours garden, its a smaller scale version of whats happened here (although nobody took a hissy fit), I don't see the big hullabaloo that you have created, Im sure this is a case of some folk from outwith moving into the county not reading the small print and/or not fully understanding the access rights. The signs and chains were also ridiculous. Also, never mind what the workmen say they maybe dont understand who owns it, we don't know how they were briefed and maybe they dont care or need to know anything other than that they require access to do their job.

[@CraftingNannie]

We recently had a vaguely similar issue in our village . Local yobs had catapulted a ball bearing into an electric sub station that powered most of the village, which is on a farmers land . He refused them access to repair ( they were able to put the majority of the village supply on another network, we were put on generators) my understanding is that if a landowner refuses access a formal letter is issued and access is given after 14 days regardless of landowners rights, but right for access is only allowed for maintenance and emergency repairs and the landowner must be compensated wether they gave permission or not . And any changes to the site must be returned or as near as possible to the original, in other words the landowner must be made " whole" again after any works.

[@raellawrence7116]

Seems like they have done you a favour with that path to protect your privacy? Not that I agree with their methods.

[@postiepatman]

I agree.

[@reb0118]

As an aside injunctions are an English legal thing. In Scotland the nearest equivalent is an interim interdict. Although there are some similarities between the legislations (not least because Scots Law HAS been influenced by English Common Law) Scots Law is derived from Roman or Civil Law.

[@user-marco-S]

It's a question where the accurate/official border is. On the map, the driveway is not on your property, while according the aerial photo it is and is the hedge on the border (how accurate are the drawed lines?). I think that the railway looks to to drawing and not to the aerial photo. And according both, your compost box and the washing line are not on your property unless you did buy/rent the extra ground. I advise to let a surveyor map out the registered border with poles (while your solicitor is present) and let your solicitor sent photos of it to the railway.

[@iansutherland-iz3bx]

A planning permission was granted for a house opposite me based on the OS map, there had been no site visit and the os map was based upon developers plans in 1968 not what was built which was 5m out. Based on the real dimensions of the plot the permission shouldn't have been granted. May be similar where the "map" is based on outdated unchecked info not real surveys

[@WhiskyMechanic]

I think you're right. The cadastral map is what has legal authority so the aerial 'evidence' is disregarded.

[@JonDingle]

Ask Network Rail for an plan, title, boundaries and description to prove their claim. The publish both the documents from them and also your deeds. As we sit here watching your videos, we only get one side of the story. That is not to say you are hiding anything, but it would clairfy beyond doubt who owns what and what third parties are entitled to do on your land. That is what I would do because you need the public to be on your side. Here in England, (it may be different in Scotland?), we have to pay for title plan from HM Land Registry and people won't do that even though it is only a few quid. You could always fence the right of way in too.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

NR has sent a document to us claiming this document is proof of NR's 'good' title to the land they are claiming to own...we plan to do a video about this document to show the public that it is definitely not proof of 'good' title and NR's solicitors know it is not! If they had a legally valid title they would have utilised the civil court process a long time ago. As they know it is not a legally valid title, they are using BTP instead to try and take our land from us.

[@truthhurts7537]

All shared access has the same established rights of access, irrespective of who actually owns the land, ie. If my neighbour owned the driveway my house sits on and in order to access my home I need to cross their land, this is a right of access and no-one is able to prevent this under common law. They need to take some chill pills climb off their high horses and realise they are not the only people in this world, or who need that railway and station maintained and open to use!

[@postiepatman]

I agree, they knew that when they bought it, however they want money for access. The technical term is a ransom strip.

[@donaldgillies2170]

The sort of people that get the English a bad name. Probably never fitted in in England either.

[@ALTNABREAC]

Maybe I could say the same about you getting your fellow man a bad name for your bitter darkened heart, filled with hate, discrimination and racial hatred!

[@TraceUK]

It is possible for you BOTH to own the road/driveway and have shared access. That’s something neither you NOR National Rail seem to be acknowledging. In which case, they have every right to access it, as do you.

[@clivewiddall3430]

Are you thick the access is via the side gate not the main drive!

[@petesmitt]

@@clivewiddall3430 Public right of way and Network Rail access are not the same thing.

[@MartinSlucutt]

​@@Carlos-im3hn The (north)eastern boundary on the Title Plan at kzbin.info/www/bejne/gHuZomyso8yHoaM appears to have the same shape as the woodland boundary but is set back from it. Why would this be the case? If it weren't for the shape of the small "missing" southeast corner, I would have suggested this could have been a mapping error during digitalisation. In my lay-person's view, on the Title Plan it looks like only a left-hand third / half of the width of the driveway is on their land - judging by the width of incoming track in dark grey from the southeast suggesting the driveway is split ownership as you suggest.

[@davidstafford803]

There would appear to be a Public Right of Way along the driveway no matter who owns it and if the Right of Way follows the course you walked in this video along the edge of your property, why did Network Rail build a new path round to the right of the declared route and in so doing destroy trees belonging to your propperty? If this new path is now the official route to the station then the original route as depicted by yourselves must now be defunct and as such could be fenced off by yourselves from the metal gate that allows access to the new path to the station, as access along the earlier route is no longer applicable.

[@edwoodsnowden]

Completely agree with you guys this whole affair is a matter of principal and not having your rights trodden on and abused.

[@ALTNABREAC]

Thank you

[@MrHughk1]

Just a we word of warning about these title plans. I have recently had my title documents converted from meets and bounds to one of these title plans. There is no survey involved in the conversion, the lawyer just draws lines on a map and asks you if it looks right! There is no agreement with neighbours or other interested parties so the title plan is only a claim until it is rebutted ie challenged in court. If you can get a hold of the original sale documentation for the station house or the meets and bounds title then you will be on firmer ground, until then please get a lawyer and settle your business in private where it belongs. I think you will have a case against the BTP, it is obvious that this is a civil dispute and they should have walked away having told you and NR to settle your claims in court. Thinking about it logically why do you think NR wold have sold the vehicle access to the station? They wold have been silly to do that so you need to find the evidence that they did, a title plan is not worth the paper it is written on in my opinion.

[@davidt5199]

The surveyor's letter says i cant confirm anything without a site visit lol.

[@ALTNABREAC]

The Moon on a stick wouldn't be good enough for some people like yourself and the Rail Forum Members!

[@grahamnimmo4656]

​@ALTNABREAC I don't like to see the little man being walked over by mega corps, but to be fair here, I firmly believe that this point raised above, regarding the surveyor having to attend site to confirm things, is not unreasonable given the circumstances. I believe that if it is not too expensive to instruct your surveyor to do this site visit, then it is the first priority for you to do before considering legal action. I hope your go fund me will soon provide sufficient funds for this first stage, if it hasn't already done so. Furthermore, I honestly believe that if you were to convince most you tubers, including my self that you are 100% right in your claim, by making a video showing the details of the measurements that you claim prove the land is yours as well as the surveyors letter confirming this, once they have completed an on site survey, then most of the viewers would be much more willing to back you and contribute to your "go fund me" so that you can go after NR in court. I know I would. However, I have seen a post by "gone in 60 seconds" that shows your alleged registered plot and that apears to show in the burdens as well as the map shown, that your drive way can only be half owned by you, due to the burden stating that the boundary is in the middle of it. I have also read many other comments referring to this aspect and wonder if you you could make a further short KZbin video to explain to us all why that isn't the case and doesn't apply here?

[@jonathanpringle8238]

@@ALTNABREAC have you invited them for a site visit?

[@jonathanpringle8238]

@@ALTNABREAC looking at this it looks like the driveway is not on land registry scotlis.ros.gov.uk/property-summary/CTH7726

[@jonathanpringle8238]

​@@ALTNABREAC looking at scotlis.ros.gov.uk/property-summary/CTH7726 it shows driveway next tour house and all land to the right is not owned by you, only the red part

[@timtam6442]

It’s blindingly obvious you need to engage the surveyor to undertake a site visit to formally ratify his primary opinions, per his recommendations

[@ALTNABREAC]

Yes but initially as suspected, the driveway is within our registered boundary

[@timtam6442]

@@ALTNABREAC you can’t take your opinion to a court of arbitration. An independent view holds much weight.

[@johnmason129]

the path seems a better solution for a right of way

[@smegheadGOAT]

Why are the police dealing and judging on A CIVIL matter?

[@ALTNABREAC]

They shouldn't be, but they are!

[@SeanieVoiceOver]

This is the major issue, NR using BTP to threaten and intimidate the home owners, under a false premise may I add, (NR's claim that they own the driveway) threats of arrest for "Aggravated Trespass" on their own land? you cannot trespass on your own land, its a legal fallacy

[@simongleed]

Surely before you purchased this property a search is carried out detailing, title deeds, conditions, boundaries, rights of way, up keeps shared access etc. The situation you find yourself in makes no sense to me there's a failing somewhere and most likely your end. NR would of jumped on this immediately had they been contacted - NR are brutal if they have a legal right.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

The conveyancing history for Station House is extensive. We undertook research into the conveyancing history ourselves checking both the Land Register of Scotland and old Sasine Register because we suspected that Network Rail did not own any land here because of what we knew about the land dispute they had with the previous occupants of Station House. Network Rail swooped in as soon as we moved in probably hoping we would not do our research to discover what the previous occupants did: that Network Rail do not own the station or any land at Altnabreac! I am thankful we did our research! Our conveyancing solicitor confirmed that there is pedestrian only public right of way over our land to access the station. That is the ONLY encumbrance to Station House.

[@postiepatman]

@@LizAltnabreac-u8h That makes sense, however you must admit you are morally bankrupt to also claim land that is not yours, ie the washing line and compost area.

[@TheRealGeewizz]

Did I hear the uploader reading out the words "the ACCESS.... is excluded from Mr Appleby's title"? I've listened to the lines several times (7.32 onwards) and I am fairly sure he reads the word access and not driveway. Is it possible that they have used "access" to mean the access and not the driveway? I mean, if they meant driveway why would they not use the word driveway? So it remains unclear to me why the uploader would insist on repeating the accusation that network rail's external solicitors say that network rail own the driveway when the letter does not claim this. Is it simply that the uploader considers it perfectly acceptable to substitute one word with another which is more convenient for his own narrative? Maybe I just misunderstood what was read aloud.

[@ronstreet6706]

They used the term "Access" rather than driveway to make it seem somehow legal to do what they did!

[@TheOGForkinCrazy]

The washing line being so close to the path is a definite problem. You'll need to watch out for knicker sniffers once people start using it. Take care to protect your smalls.😂

[@steviewonder5499]

Alll very confusing,,,you need to post a really detailed map showing the easements and rights of way to enable your audience to make an informed judgement...... you live right next to a railway track and a former station(?) so is it not probable that NR have rights of some description?

[@Ireallydontknow8581]

Just posted copy of map

[@itsverygreen532]

@@Ireallydontknow8581 Yes, I have seen it and it very clearly shows there is a track down the eastern boundary between the house and the wood that they do not own. What I suspect the problem is that in years gon by it was very clear they did not own the track along the eastern edge, and with surveying tech being what it was, the map showing a wood and a track for the railway people along the boundary and their land to the West of the track was all fine. What they have done is use aerial photography and GPS location that was not available when the map was drawn to show that the track was possibly drawn in the wrong place by about 3 feet ... the intent of the map is clear though, a piece of woodland to the east shoudl have a track down the Western edge that they don't own. There is also the question of the light blue right of way that runs directly through their cottage ... in reality if you look on the ground it runs behind the back of their cottage, but if you start applying GPS coordinates, its going to end up directly through their living room .. so the "insisting the 1cm precision of the GPS is correct" bit could well backfire ...

[@scootyman2974]

I still don’t understand why you don’t just get a solicitor to sort this. If it’s as you say which I have no doubts, it should be a walk in the park.

[@ALTNABREAC]

The reason for the GofundMe is to get a solicitor, hopefully we will get things sorted. Thanks for the comment

[@brianjohnson5789]

Network Rail can outspend them on legal costs, and will try to wear them down by simply extending proceedings, delaying proceedings, and if needed appealing. The process itself will be financially and emotionally destructive. Any ordinary citizen versus a state funded company with infinite pockets is a tough battle to take on through simple court action, unless you are significantly wealthy. So, even if they are right, which looks highly likely, Network Rail will use the process itself to try and win. There are ways to fight back, use the many and various safety breaches which if reported will be looked at in detail by the regulator, complain about the police action (both forces here BTP & Scottish cops) in the right way to force review of the police approach and if necessary appeal that to the IOPC, which will force a more independent review. Go an sit down with the local MP, Member of Scottish Parliament, Councillors, etc. I would also be reviewing your insurance policies see if any cover legal costs for stuff like this. I would be demanding your conveyancing solicitor refers this matter to their own professional indemnity insurers with a view to providing funds to resolve. And so on. Its a tough one. I would also be writing letters to the rail magazines, and on the rail forums, and get some publicity that way, you would be surprised what get a summary published in a magazine read by lots of the rail industry would do. I would also try and speak to some of the local rail union reps.

[@scootyman2974]

@@brianjohnson5789 yes it’s shows the unequal playing field these people are on doesn’t it when you explain it like that. Thanks for your comments. Certainly helps me to understand the complexity of it a little better 👍

[@petesmitt]

In my experience, government entities and service providers can get away with a lot; I didn't want a smart meter fitted to my electricity box, so I padlocked the box and put a sign on the box stating no smart meter to be fitted, then told the service provider they would need to advise me when they wanted to read the meter, so I could arrange for the box to be unlocked; I came home from work one day to discover they had come onto my property, removed the padlock and fitted a smart meter; my solicitor advised me that there was nothing I could do about it and that if I removed the smart meter, the service provider could legally bill me for damaging their property.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

Wow, that is so wrong! I'm sorry you experienced that level of tyranny but that is the reality of the world we live in. Smart meters are spyware....These companies make it sound like these new technologies are to benefit people or help the climate or whatever pretence they use but it is ALWAYS to benefit them and is about them making money.

[@roberthardy2013]

You can request that a smart meter be made dumb, just ask them.

[@petesmitt]

@@roberthardy2013 Not where I live..

[@forestdad]

Buying property next to the railway is always going to cause issues

[@truthhurts7537]

Not just that but Network Rail have right of access as the drive has been used since the station was built as its access road. If someone owned the land controlling your access to your land, you would have right of access along any historically use path or driveway. No one can block that "right of access" if they could it would dispossess many thousands of people of their land and property. Right of Access is established under common law. These twits don't seem to have the basic common sense to understand! At the end of the day Network Rail could also make a compulsorily purchase order. Easier to just let them use the drive and keep the railway and station open and safe - which these idiots couldn't give a toss about!

[@paulgray2387]

Looks nice and tidy to me. What’s is your point?

[@radleysmith7528]

Nice sympathetically built access for station users/walkers 👍 Please don't abuse or obstruct any member of the public using a confirmed right of way

[@ALTNABREAC]

Not sure if you even watched or listened to the video, it appears not

[@gk-zw3ck]

Its likely they have a right of access to maintain the railway. The public right of way through a pedestrian gate is irrelevant. I think the courts would look at how the right of way was originally envisaged. I.e vehicle access to maintain a railway which is clearly still in use. This would be true if even they dont own the land. If you take this to court you will probably bankrupt yourselves. Think arbitration would prob be the better option if thats possible ?

[@jonpotter5536]

I'm still confused. You show an aerial view of the house and access road from this surveyor. It shows a boundary at the Eastern edge of the road yet you vlsim the new path built by NR which is in the wood further east is on land you own. How are you claiming ownership of this piece of extra woodland?

[@bolwarracolt1]

Asked that. The smallest easement is 12ft then 24 and 32. The map showed a curved boundary also.. Rare curved rural boundaries

[@ALTNABREAC]

@@bolwarracolt1 It's not an easement, it's a right of way for 'Footfall' it's a footpath on our land.

[@radleysmith7528]

@@ALTNABREAC So its a claim to possessory title or absolute ?

[@jonpotter5536]

​@@ALTNABREACBut you don't own the land that the footpath is on!!

[@JamieW-o7b]

You either get an injunction to stop this, or you sue your solicitor that did the conveyancing or the previous owner for non-disclosure? You will get nowhere on your own.

[@truthhurts7537]

They can't because it is "Right of Access" the road has been used as a right of access since the station was built, it's established right of access which enables Network Rail to access their own land. The same as if you couldn't'[t access your property due to someone else owning the drive, if it is established right of access you can not be prevented from using it under Common Law.

[@ChrisLambert-Yngvegodi]

Presumably the right of way still exists, so the path is essentially meaningless

[@adif7542]

The right of way exists providing a member of the public passes over the public right of way within the last 12 months. But normally if no one has passed over the land in 12 months the right of way still exists. Only scrupulous landowners will temporarily block a public right-of-way for 12 months and as soon as the 12 months are up they will permanently block the right away.

[@trainman665]

You can apply to move a right of way. That’s probably what Network Rail is aiming at. If that was my house, I’d rather keep the right of way up the driveway, and keep the privacy of the wooded area.

[@trainman665]

@@adif7542Is that under Scottish law?

[@ChrisLambert-Yngvegodi]

@@trainman665 I agree but that's not really the issue here

[@eatsinabeat]

I would be going to the solicitors who did the searches prior to your purchase, obviously you know what's contained within the search which forms the vast majority of your issues, not up on Scottish law, but surely the title deeds are not open to question or interpretation aside from the facts of the matter as to ownership.

[@barryclayton8447]

Just take it to court and get a proper resolution no point going back and forth the judge will decide one way or another

[@TuftyVFTA]

That's a very strange letter ? after the second paragraph ending in ".... partially included." There is the start of a new sentence "The eastern" but the sentence isn't continued or finished? I'd suggest it's not a very good chartered surveyor that sends out correspondence with incomplete sentences in it! And before anyone suggests it, it's not that the rest of the sentence has been digitally removed, it would have to have been removed for thousands of frames of the video, and that removal would be really obvious. The rest of the sentence simply hasn't either been written, or for some reason hasn't been printed when the letter was printed. Very strange!!!

[@tizme6105]

Not only a dodgy print of someone's letter but pretty worthless when he sums it up with the fact that he would have to visit the site to confirm anything. Hardly worth the paper it is partially printed on.

[@ALTNABREAC]

@@tizme6105 Not as worthless as your opinion.

[@iansutherland-iz3bx]

People need to remember most of what we think we know about property & access rights is English law, this is Scotland which is a different legal system particularly different in the area of property. Wouldn't be surprised if this is NR making an English assumption about wayleaves and rights of way

[@RADARLIVE89]

Can you not show the title plan and aerial maps in a video to show the clear boundaries for the land you own? I don’t understand why you haven’t done this yet, it’s very confusing to viewers when it’s just your word. A clear and simple explanation from yourselves with the maps laid out in a video is very much needed. People have been asking you to do this for ages

[@zfid]

DING!!!

[@ALTNABREAC]

scotlis.ros.gov.uk/map-search/CTH7726/1

[@grahamnimmo4656]

​@ALTNABREAC so I would highly recommend thst you put this link in a separate video, not buried in the comments so that it will be brought to every ones attention. I can now see what you originally showed to the BTP that convinced them to just leave and also why the surveyor's letter in this video says what it says! However I would recommend that you also establish legally, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the overlay of the aerial photo is the defining interpretation and standard of the property boundary. I would first start by asking the organisation that provide this info, whether or not this can be relied upon to legally determine the property boundary. You also mention taking measurements from fixed points such as your house. Could you point out or show us what these measurements are and what source you are taking them from to apply to your property? That would be very helpful for us all to better understand.

[@zulu1184]

@@grahamnimmo4656 my reading of that is that the title deeds appear to show ownership of at least half the trackway/drive (and possibly the full width) beyond the cattle grid, but without any retained right of access for Network Rail - in which case them using it to access the site with vehicles in order to perform works would likely constitute a trespass by NR (and on that basis I think this was clearly a civil issue that BTP had no right intervening) but that it does however look like the actual footpath construction works are on NR's side of the boundary. Add to that, that I think that a proper accurate GPS survey comparing the Land Registry map to fixed reference points like the house and water tower would be needed to identify the exact boundary properly - bearing in mind that OS mapping 99% confidence limit can be up to 4 metres out in rural areas. There may be some parallax error in the aerial photos, however as the location of the house and water tower on the mapping and aerial photo hosted on land registry seem to match very well, I cannot see the aerial photo being far off at all - suggesting that the cattle grid and driveway is fully owned by the house rather than NR.

[@Jason-cj3ih]

I think if it was me, and if at all possible, I would be taking it upon myself to lay another path turning right before the gate and around my land ( thus providing public access to the station ) .

[@davidt5199]

So they wanted to put in a path that stops people walking past your house ? Would you prefer they did walk closer to your house? Lets hope for your sake the don't make a compulasory order for your land and put in a car park for the railway.

[@ALTNABREAC]

How many times do we need to say that we have no issue with the public accessing our land

[@davidt5199]

@@ALTNABREAC ok ,but the current access doesn't look very good for disabaled folk. What is there reasoning for them putting in the new path ? it is probably the local council making them meet health and safety standards.or would you prefer they put a new path in at the side of your house? Surely these are things you have asked them ? Usually 3 sides to every story and we only have one so far .

[@martinkelsen6049]

The point is that NR bullied their way into doing the path, and did it without consultation with the land owner and despite clear objections. So although the path as a new right of way, may have been the perfect solution, is still down to both parties, to ensure the land owners rights are respected, whilst any mutually beneficial work is done, and done to ensure the minimum of disruption to the land owner, and do the work in a way that blends in with the existing property. What about the chopped down trees they left everywhere? A wood chip path, as laid down by our Council in a local park, would have coped well with foot traffic, and would just need a yearly top up. No need for heavy machinery. NR are just bullies.

[@davidt5199]

@martinkelsen6049 ever tried to use a wheelchair on a woodchip path? How do we know network rail hasn't tried to sort it with them.They have to maintain it and make it better. Looks to me like they have tried to move the path away from the house, which will take people away from the house. It's clear the owners don't want any work done, but it needs to be done.

[@martinkelsen6049]

@@davidt5199 these wheelchair users are going to struggle on the platform and down that new path, and on the driveway, both on and off the property. The current and historic access to the station is really for ramblers and cyclists, and never looks to have had wheelchair users in mind. And where would they go?

[@batwillow]

This is now even more serious, this is now a criminal matter that needs to be resolved in court. Damages for the destruction of property of a private dwelling by a corperation supported by BTP is unforgivable and the BTP should also be taken to task. I hope that you have instucted the Scottish High Court that you wish to press charges against NR and their contracted companies as well as BTP. Taking the fact that Alarm, Harrassment and Distress has been caused by false allegations of arrest by BTP if you do not bow down to the illegal trespass is actually Malfiesense by the BTP, also the Scottish Police Office can by taken to court for ignoring the fact that a crime is being committed on you property.

[@timoliver01]

So your washing line area and the new path is outside of that boundary line that you showed in the final image?

[@ALTNABREAC]

Yes that is outwith the boundary. Owned through 'Solum rights'

[@timoliver01]

@@ALTNABREAC Thanks for replying. Are solum rights easy to prove do they come with paper work? Also I have looked on the Scottish land information service website and that land appears to be with the same area as the actual train line - as in the boundary lines that designate the area of train track also encompass the wooded area. Do you think that the rail operator thinks they own the title to it? Not trying to antagonise I just have genuine curiosity. Power to the people, stick it to the man!

[@radleysmith7528]

Exactly, 99% of the newly constructed path has been built on land that isn't owned by the house dwellers. Its not even subject to possessory title or official claim. How can you seek sympathy & support for something that's only intention is to benefit the public then selfishly claim ownership & power over its potential use. I find many of their explanation disingenuous especially when suggesting "they aren't against the station operating". It certainly gives a level of credence to several blog reports regarding the "Nutters" who often frequent the facility.

[@timoliver01]

@@radleysmith7528 I am beginning to wonder the same thing. Not sure there is a real issue here.

[@JD-mx2gv]

@@firkin1024 it's the same as with a highway. The highway authority don't always own the ground below the road, just the surface they are responsible for. Someone else often owns the ground below so you can own the solum of something but have no right to interfere with the use on the surface. An old map may indicate that they own the ground below the railway or forestry uses nearby, but they will have no right to interfere with those uses in the same way you can't block a highway just because you own the ground beneath. They don't know what solum means.

[@philiprodney2164]

Could you not clearly define the public right of way with a fence of some sort,

[@chrisjohnson3590]

I thought the same

[@ALTNABREAC]

The public right of way is irrelevant and is no issue

[@Jonnythebaker]

Have you a mortgage on the property if so you should make them aware of the situation. The reason being the value of the property may be reduced due to BRs claim.

[@paulgray2387]

Who is BR?

[@postiepatman]

So basically what you are saying in relation to the deeds is correct, if NR park at the gate and walk with whatever equipment they need to service the station then that is legal. However if they want vehicular access they need to financially settle a fee.

[@grahamallen1970]

dont know the full story as most of the vids just seam like a whinge fest and un watchable from beginning to end....you two are obviously traumatised by the perceived injustice..... i dont like the idea of the corporate company getting one over on the little man...but reminds me of some one buying a house on the edge of Heathrow airport and moaning about noise.....sell up buy a house where there are no issues but please not next to mine...dont think you would be happy for long im not a troll but you put your life on youtube for all to see so you get many opinions

[@smoggydrones5664]

Strange situation. You would think a large organisation like BR would get there facts right. If you were so sure you should not of moved your car. An arrest would have took it to court. It would have been sorted then.

[@ALTNABREAC]

We can't risk being arrested, we have animals, they almost died last time.

[@Jim-u9r]

Have you told network rail, how much your ransom is yet?

[@austinlloyd9757]

😂😂😂😂😂I'm thinking the same $$$$$$$$$€€€€€€€€€€£££££££ all will be amazing 😂😂😂😂😂

[@peterreed3104]

Network Rail are Trying to Create a Ransom Strip!

[@bolwarracolt1]

Amazing. The right of way is how wide...? 12 foot 24 foot or 32 foot by law. So anything right of the gate is right of way. From the left of gate if marked correctly. They can bulldoze this, and it's none of your business. It's our land... Not yours. Now I can see the line from station. I can understand you thinking it's your land.. So it seems to be a 12 ft easement.. Get educated on maps. But if it's crown land. It's our land. Probably is your driveway. But to the right is easement...... Needs to be a site survey. I can see reference points..

[@Doomedtofreeze76]

In the grand scheme of things, all of this matters not one iota, because in precisely 22 hours from now, a Vogon Destructor Fleet will be arriving to obliterate the Earth to make way for a hyperspace bypass. I advise you to fetch your towels and carry them with you at all times. Best of luck. Nice path, by the way.

[@stephenholmes1036]

Might I suggest you write the head of NR Scotland. Plus might I suggest you speak to your conveyancing Solicitor and get an independent specialist solicitor to check everything. NR rarely if ever give up access rights please get a specialist to check

[@DesHeaton]

Network Rail have done a nice job on the pathway. At least now you won't have people walking into your garden anymore.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

If you think that trespassing and building on another person's land unlawfully is a 'nice job' then you support wrongdoing and have no respect for property rights and laws. Let them come and do a 'nice job' building a path on your land without your permission.....I'm sure you would be paying attention to property laws then!

[@jasonbell2619]

Uh, have you not seen that they left a lot of destroyed trees pretty much where they had fallen?! If they were being respectful, then they should've tidied up and cleared any mess they made. They're just being total arses and disrespectful. 😕

[@Ireallydontknow8581]

@@DesHeaton would agree, if the track wasn't shared and the railway platform belongs to them

[@leonhunter2638]

debatable I've worked in construction all my life if they threw that path in 3 days and only used a compactor plate which appears to be the case in 2-3 months the ground will settle and have humps and hallows all over it not to mention the hill down to the station is very steep and the edging they ran across the bottom is a trip hazard which is only a few steps away from the line. By todays health and safety standards without a doubt in my mind that path would fail if anyone other than a multi-million pound company like network rail installed it and a reasonable person not paid off inspected it.

[@bdh_555]

⁠@@jasonbell2619I would argue that due to the dispute on ownership, this was the correct course of action. If the vegetation was removed from the site, and it is proven not to be network rail’s land, they can also be accused of theft

[@Du1uxDog]

The platform end of the new walkway is going to be a health and safety nightmare in winter conditions, unless there is more construction to be carried on the walkway.

[@radleysmith7528]

Tea, Coffee, Hot Chocolate, umbrellas and phone charge facilities available at the Station Master's cottage who will responsibly provide a gritting service during inclement weather to negate risk of accident & compensation claims when traversing her their land.

[@brianjohnson5789]

@@radleysmith7528 you absolutely do not build paths which are sloped downwards towards a track, such that if you let a wheeled buggy or pushchair go it would free wheel down onto the track. if you take a look around others stations around the UK they are never done like that. and it could just as easily be a tools buggy used by railway workers which rolled down in front of a train.

[@badwolf1984]

Why Network Rail cant just ask in advance unless its an emergency that relates to the rail, Can we access the driveway and offer to refresh the surface of the whole driveway, so its nice for you and for the public to access the platform, maybe just prepose it to them. To be honest and frank here I can see if they need to get to the platform for maintenance they just need to ask to be allowed access via the driveway, and i assume you would reasonably allow access. If the condition of access/public right of way is poor condition and its in the titles that the owner has to keep the upkeep this would be for you to upkeep. As for the damage that's outright criminal, the contactors who did the job where just doing as they was told, but I also saw the police probably BTP, so the port of call was to call your own local police as they land was not British Rail or National Highways. I know it wont do much as it like reporting the old bill to the old bill, but it will create a Crime Reference number, maybe the CPS will pick it up. For the chains and lock, may I suggest a gate without the lock as there is some doubt about right of way, and with the public right of way gate i have seen it has been locked in the past videos, this is a right of way so should not be locked just latched. The last thing I see that could happen is they take legal action and make a compulsory purchase order, thus they could buy all the land east of property and you would lose, either by court order or a long a drawn out legal battle which when you cant afford it anymore any income you get from the CPO will pay for your legal costs and probably see you lose your home. I See this is causing you stress and from an outsiders point of view you have your rights, I hope that network rail and you guys can mediate and get this sorted asap, they want the station open for the public, you have stated the same.

[@patcollins7208]

L

[@reb0118]

AFAIAA neither the CPS nor the Highways Agency have jurisdiction in Scotland.

[@leonhunter2638]

So I don't agree with how network rail have conducted themselves or how BTP have taken their word over yours when you have shown them proof, I hope you do get this sorted and although its probably not relevant I noticed how steep that path is before the tracks which in my opinion would be extremely dangerous should someone using a wheelchair use that rather than following the old pedestrian right of way that you two were fine with people using. they also put an edging at the end of that path and with the 3 day rush they took to install it chances are the ground will settle leaving a lip which people could trip over and with it being what appears to be only 2-3 steps away from the drop onto the track and there not being any sorts or guard rails is also dangerous. What I will say is your unlikely to win and at best you may get offered some sort of pay-out to reach an agreement if its reasonable in both terms and value I suggest asking for a condition they place proper fencing separating your boundary from theirs. Chances are they will go the route of burying you in paper work and spending 10x more than what they need to in legal fees than coming to a reasonable agreement with you two though. Good luck.

[@PeteBrooksbank]

I'm so confused by what's going on here because you seem so sure of your position without having a solicitor, and Network Rail have an entire team of them who deal with these types of disputes every day.... I'm not taking sides but you really need a solicitor ASAP. These videos ultimately achieve nothing because you're not experts in law.

[@TraceUK]

@@stewartmacpherson3230Yep it’s clearly a shared access issue. I own a property with a private driveway and share it with my neighbour who also owns it. We have shared access rights, simple!

[@ALTNABREAC]

One sided story, are you being ignorant to what Network Rail have said and done on camera?

[@ALTNABREAC]

These videos get the truth out there, which is what we are trying to achieve

[@lumo7461]

Don't you think network rails entire team of solicitors would've sorted this out already if they had true legal ownership in court!!! But they HAVEN'T!!!! That's because they know they're in the wrong.

[@leebryant1973]

So why has the gate got ring for attention on it it’s a public right of way I don’t get it

[@ScuderiaTurini]

Is the underlying issue that Network Rail want to create a shelter at the Halt point and want to improve the passenger access to that?

[@ALTNABREAC]

The issue is land ownership

[@jca111]

Publish your deeds. Did they have rights of access etc across your land.

[@ALTNABREAC]

We did say in the video that Network Rail have no right of access

[@Ireallydontknow8581]

Just posted copy of deeds

[@Ireallydontknow8581]

@@jca111 kzbin.info/www/bejne/gHuZomyso8yHoaMsi=x5qPaVRGnHM8US2q

[@Ireallydontknow8581]

@@stuff_i_build kzbin.info/www/bejne/gHuZomyso8yHoaMsi=JrYss9fH68GW6ZYc

[@Ireallydontknow8581]

@@stuff_i_build you might need to be quick to see the deeds as my posts seem to disappear?

[@markdumelow4352]

Unfortunately,situations like this are bread and butter for surveyors. Title plans are fairly useless for anything other than a rough outline of the layout of the plot. Their scale and the fact that they are commonly based on often out of date OS maps mean they can't be relied on for determining precise boundaries. Measurements may well match up, but sadly this is not enough. Unless Network Rail are going to be a perpetual nuisance to you. I would personally let it go. It's an incredibly stressful and expensive process trying to resolve this sort of thing with no guarantees you will come out on top.

[@petebony3093]

If it's a recorded right of way, which you yourself state @ 3:25 then what the heck is your problem? Just do the sensible thing and get your solicitor to sort it one way or another and then you will not have to keep putting these (Very repetitive) videos up!

[@RobFalla]

The public seem to be hooked by this little drama. Look at the view numbers. That’s a pretty good reason to keep posting

[@scottodmann4743]

If arbor law is anything in England like it is in America, that’s where the largest punishment for them may lie. In America when someone trespasses and removes trees, they are required to replace with like regardless of cost or obstacle. Some of those trees look 30+ years old. Make sure you measure circumference and document species. If you can afford it, getting a licensed arborist (not sure if GB has a different title) to provide a report of species, age and what it will take to replace. Keep in mind, newly planted trees require constant watering which should also be part of the consideration. Al Capone went to prison for tax evasion. Maybe the trespass is the lesser evil here.

[@ALTNABREAC]

Thanks for your comment, appreciated 🙂

[@raymondmcgarry3486]

I feel for you guys. This stuff makes me sick to the core. This country is a disgrace run by a bunch of corrupt people. Disgusting

[@mudbuddies1068]

Where have the bike racks, way out sign and information board gone? Looks like it's all been ripped out since the station was temporarily suspended, along with the gate.

[@mudbuddies1068]

@@Carlos-im3hn seems a bit of a waste having to move it all when the station has operated with an entrance / exit since 1874. Corrour is a good example where the station is well maintained and used and seemingly no access issues for Network Rail or ScotRail staff.

[@AlpakaWhacker]

Ok, on the other video I commented on, I was very much on-board however having now watched this one, I'm not as on-board as I was before - None of the path that has been constructed is on your land nor do you own any of the land from 11:28 to about 15:40 and your own printouts showing the land you own also supports that fact. What I would still agree with you on is that I don't believe they had the right to access your driveway in the way they did and use your driveway as a construction site while building the new path.

[@itsverygreen532]

Except, at least half their driveway appears to be built outside their land ... their boundary appears to run to the centre of the cattlegrid!

[@AlpakaWhacker]

@@itsverygreen532 no no, the entire driveway is definitely within their land

[@itsverygreen532]

@@AlpakaWhacker Not according to the document link they posted, there is a very clear track along their eastern boundary that they don't own.

[@AlpakaWhacker]

@@itsverygreen532 oh, that's the land to the immediate east of their driveway, the area with all the trees and their compost heap. This strip of land runs along the entire length of their driveway

[@itsverygreen532]

The title map they posted very clearly shows a track running down the easern edge that they do not own and should be open to NR staff. It very clearly shows the forrestry track continuing all the way to the station platform.

[@meandering99]

Network Rail and their contractors seem to have done a really tidy job of the new pathway.

[@ALTNABREAC]

It's like you're not human!

[@Streamer687]

Tidy or not, when anyone, including large companies with their OWN policing agencies, DUMP anything onto private property, it then becomes the Property owners RIGHTS to remove the objects DUMPED, or to USE the objects dumped for their OWN Usage or Sale. BTW, getting it removed and BILLED to Network Rail, MIGHT be the way to go with illegal dumping of gravel?

[@DaveDukes-by6bl]

Have the works been completed, or is this continuing?

[@DaveDukes-by6bl]

Yep, looks very tidy, much safer for train passengers.

[@ChrisLambert-Yngvegodi]

Your 'solom' rights?

[@rodneykilpatrick3401]

I’m not sure here. This is really straightforward, if it’s fee simple land…pay for survey and any party that has breached your rights (including the police) are liable for costs and civil reparation.

[@ALTNABREAC]

When you have a solicitor, it is straightforward, we do not have one

[@gerrymills3332]

@@ALTNABREAC well get one!

[@Streamer687]

@@ALTNABREAC It will be a tough thing to find a solicitor that will go up against ANY large corporation/company, as money will talk. Still and all, at least the letter from the land surveyor can be made into a Photocopy, and sent registered mail to Net Rail as PROOF that you own the specified lands?(Whats registered mail and a photocopy cost?) I say registered mail... as they would have to SIGN for the letter delivered, thus providing proof that they recieved the information.

[@rodneykilpatrick3401]

@@ALTNABREACI sincerely hope you find representation. Donation placed…it’s not much but hopefully helps.

[@reb0118]

​@@ALTNABREACget a solicitor. Most offer the initial interview for free. Take your written evidence to support your case but crucially do not talk over the solicitor just listen (even if it's not what you want to hear). Your initial interview is short and there is no time to go off on tangents.

[@SoftAsFur]

It's unfortunate but this is only going to be resolved in court. ....is it possible to get a 'restraining order' against the railway? if not can you get a restraining order against these specific individuals?

[@ALTNABREAC]

We are be prevented from doing that due to funding at the moment.

[@johngibson3837]

​@@ALTNABREACcan't you get legal aid in Scotland

[@TomAtkins1912]

@@johngibson3837 I do not believe you can get Legal Aid for civil cases.

[@lloydmourant8055]

If you’re so sure of your facts in this case, why don’t you seek resolution through the Scottish Courts? It was interesting to hear in a previous upload that you were both willing to “Fully cooperate” with Network Rail in order to reach an amicable agreement! Personally, I think the pair of you are hell-bent on confrontation, nothing more, nothing less.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

You are wrong. We do not confront, we stand firmly on our rights. Perhaps you should be asking NR the same question you're asking us - if they were so sure of their facts why have they not sought resolution through the civil route instead of using their private security BTP to threaten to arrest us to get them unlawfully onto our land? The short answer is that they already know they do not own our driveway or any land here at Altnabreac. We have shown a willingness to try and work with NR because we know there is a service here that should be up and running. That is the reasonable way to deal with a civil dispute. However, NR chose to act unreasonably by falsely claiming to own our driveway and using the BTP to get them on our land unlawfully. NR committed aggravated trespass and criminal damage and acted wholly unreasonably. That is CONFRONTATIONAL.

[@lloydmourant8055]

@@LizAltnabreac-u8h With the upmost respect, once again you’re merely repeating previous waffle. Please, take your case to Court of Law and be done with it. To be honest, I’m extremely surprised that you’ve chosen to air your dirty laundry through social media, this is after all a civil case between two parties and not one for the entire world to endure, is it not? In reality, the only thing you’ve achieved thus far is to pour fuel onto an already raging fire. Good luck in Court.👍😎

[@jonpotter5536]

In the letter from surveyor, the sentence starting "the eastern...." has been blanked out. Can you tell us what it said before editing?

[@ALTNABREAC]

No writing from the letter has been removed, so stop your nonsense!

[@jonpotter5536]

​@ALTNABREAC suggest you re-look at the letter. At the end of the second paragraph a new sentence starts "The Eastern..." and then stops. What do you think the reason for this is? Either; somethings been blanked out or, the surveyor doesn't have a very good eye for detail- which as a surveyor you probably need!

[@ALTNABREAC]

@@jonpotter5536 I'm sure you would try and strangle a Gnat or swallow a Camel no matter what was contained in that letter.

[@jonpotter5536]

Its a simple question. A professional letter that you've paid £100 for has an incomplete two word sentence and you don't seem concerned. Either somethings been blanked out or your professional surveyor isn't very professional!

[@carltrucker]

Please be careful about using his letter, their legal team will focus on the usage of “Appears’ and “clear definition can only be given following a site visit

[@ALTNABREAC]

Yes, will be working on that

[@johng.1703]

the public right of way is the other entrance towards the station, on you title map it is the blue line. your title says it is vehicles too. oh and the track isn't included in your titke map. the satilite overview isn't accurate. the track is in grey next to your title.

[@jamesmorton3266]

If they claim that the driveway is THEIRS, why didn't they make it straight rather than deviate around it?

[@ALTNABREAC]

Yes exactly, like we said in the video 👍

[@Scotland999]

So, Is it you don't mind them doing their job its that you want a notice before doing so? But they have a job to do and at somepoint they will do it.

[@tuc-dh4df]

In the past a railway company must have sold the station and land to somebody?, surly there are records of sale

[@str0w4er]

Right!... Tell the truth now!..... Did you remove the trackside notices from the Station platform?

[@ALTNABREAC]

Ask Scotrail

[@musicman4164]

'Tell the truth.....', lol 😂 😂 😂 😂

[@jamesmorton3266]

What is your own lawyer doing about it as you stated he said it was all your property if you have no satisfaction from your lawyer contact the law society

[@davidwhite9159]

A public right of way may exist but you are correct in that it doesn’t necessarily mean that network rail can use this for vehicles. Also it should be remembered that they don’t need to cross your land to get plant & equipment to the station as they can use access, which is less that 700m away, via a level crossing and then use road-rail plant to access & work on the station. In my opinion Network Rail are being extremely lazy in not using this obvious option and BTP should be enforcing them to use this option as it defuses the tensions. Finally this dispute needs to go to court and if shown that both Network Rail & BTP, in their support of Network Rail, are in the wrong, compensation MUST be paid by both parties in the wrong plus all works on land that Network Rail don’t own must be removed and the land restored and restored to what it should look like now and not “we will plant stuff and it will look the same in a few years!”.

[@jonpotter5536]

Elswhere in the thread you claim you own the land under 5 miles of railtrack, the station & platform, the level crossing and all associated buildings!

[@ALTNABREAC]

Yes, that is correct.

[@jonpotter5536]

😂

[@timtam6442]

Note how NR’s solicitors state it is NR,s opinion, and not theirs

[@stud3103]

If there is no station then surely the rights of the public are pointless as there is no need for anyone to be there. There just being bullies.

[@mcscotty1625]

I hope this gets resolved. I have had my fair share of run ins with utilities companies and Councils in the past. I have had telecoms cables installed across land without wayleaves. Power companies turning up in the middle of the night to access power lines without notice which they are supposed to do.

[@LizAltnabreac-u8h]

Thank you for your support and sorry to hear you've had to experience similar intrusions by the corporates to your property rights.

[@jhynton95]

The drive way needs to be taken and fence off from the house and relay the drive way at the rear side. I don't know how you can buy a house where people need to access.

[@camofilms]

Have they not done you a favour putting the path on the forestry side, did nwr pay forestry for the land? Is there not a middle ground?

[@bolwarracolt1]

Just found road to station on our public road you claim as your own. Plus wikipedia has been altered to say no road by someone. Definitely a public road/easement to station.

[@ALTNABREAC]

No there's not, even on Scotrail's website it says no road access. For a start it's a private road to the forest track. Then locked forestry gates, so you couldn't be more wrong.

[@gandalf2439]

I have watched the series of videos on this. To me, it seems that although they claim the driveway the don’t even own the right of way to the station , as they have built a new path to the station it would seem that they have moved the original route. To me that is confusing . They have not produced any info about this, and it would surely need planning permission to do this , now it look as though they have created a second right of way which is also on your property without at least consulting yourselves . This could mean that they have broken local bylaws. Send them a cease and desist letter stopping them from using the new footpath or better still the old right of way

[@nickholly954]

Why didn’t network rail simply build the pathway outside of your gate and cattle grid, skirting your land, it appears to be only around 20 - 30 feet away ?

[@dogit1840]

I did get my land surveyed my neighbor was so dysfunctional he cut the corner of his house off with a chainsaw. That still didn't meet requirements lol

[@MartinSlucutt]

Have been following your channel with interest but something appears to not be matching up here... Compare: 1) Your surveyor's overlay on the aerial view at 21:43 where the (north)eastern boundary of your property is marked up against the boundary of the woodland to the northeast with 2) The (north)eastern boundary on the Title Plan at kzbin.info/www/bejne/gHuZomyso8yHoaM which appears to have the same shape as the woodland boundary but is set back from it? Why would this be the case? If it weren't for the shape of the small "missing" southeast corner, I would have suggested this could have been a mapping error during digitalisation. Therefore, I suggest you need to find any historic documentation and maps that you can for the boundaries of your property. Not to get controversial, but in my lay-person's view, on the Title Plan it looks like only a left-hand third / half of the width of the driveway is on your land - judging by the width of incoming track in dark grey from the southeast. Only a detailed survey on the ground with exact measurements would be able to tell you for sure. Also, on the surveyor's overlay, the (south)west boundary of your property is inline with the (south)west boundary of the neighbouring property to the south. But on the Title Plan, the (south)west boundary does not align with the dotted line of what appears to be the (south)west boundary of the neighbouring property. I suggest you get a copy of their Title Plan and compare it with yours. Out of interest, I may have missed this, but who owns the woodland to the (north)east of your property?

[@mailbox1016]

I would have thought it was a shared driveway as both yourselves and NR would require access at some point.