A family has been forced to build a new driveway through their garden after a shared access was blocked with five concrete kerb stones as part of a long-running neighbour dispute.
The mini blockade on a luxury home cul-de-sac in Coldham has stopped Jamie Lunny and his family getting to land at the back where his wife keeps horses.
The dispute is over a shared driveway to the land behind the £500,000 homes at numbers five and six where both home owners have horses and stabling.
Matt Pilling, who owns the drive and lives at 6 Bramley Court, said he put the kerb stones up as a speed restriction after his two year old daughter was nearly knocked down and killed by an “unauthorised visitor” to his neighbour.
But Mr Lunny said the drive is not long enough to be able to build up speed for such a thing to happen and it was the first he had heard of a near miss with the youngster.
Mr Lunny, of 5 Bramley Court, said: “The access road is owned by my neighbour but in our deeds, as in many situations like this, it states that we have access over it at all times.
“Two weeks ago they put up a sign saying it was shut for four days. Builders turned up and started digging.
“The builders said they were installing speed humps, but these are not ordinary speed humps; these are the same as the ones councils use to close a road permanently. “They’re only on the part I use. He’s not put any where he goes.”
He claims he was advised by police to install CCTV cameras to monitor the situation.
“The access is the only one for vets or emergency vehicles,” he said. “If there is a fire there’s no way a fire engine could get through which is why we are building a new drive.”
The kerbs are 12cm high and spaced in such a way that it is impossible to drive a vehicle over it.
Mr Lunny said: “I built this as my dream home 12 years ago but two and a half years ago new neighbours moved next door and since then there has been one thing after another.
Mr Pilling, an associate of Capita – a London property company- declined to be interviewed but said in an email that he had contacted police and it was also a civil case.
He wrote:
“The owners of number five have installed CCTV to which I do not authorise the recording or photography of any property relating to 6 Bramley Court.”
He said his neighbours had been “warned by police over the recording of private property and children as this violates Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, as the property is also classed as commercial premises, this violates the Data Protection Act.
“The speed restrictors require no planning authority and have been installed as per the highways agency guidelines although this is not required for private access.”
He said that only the owners of number 5 had rights of access and advised that the driveway was under CCTV observation.
No photographs were to be used of the drive, he said, because the area was private property and access to the area was trespassing.
Any unauthorised access would be reported to police, he added.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here