To get down to where I live I have to drive down a public footpath for about 200 yards for which Stafford County Council have put up a sign saying authorised access only sat nav error, past my place a car can't go due to mud track anyway. However the 200 yards to my place is tarmaced allowing me and my clients and service vehicles access. They have also erected a standard road name sign as well.

At NO point does this footpath cross my property, I have to stress, but down to and along side only.

Stafford County Council are now saying that due to the vehicle access to my place I am responsible for maintenance and any accidents on it. That means if a walker trips and hit his head on a tree trunk on the farmers edge of the footpath over 100 yards from my place I am liable to pay compensation and legal and medical bills. Should the council decided on remedial repairs, ie fill in potholes, they say they will charge me the cost. This surely can't be right

I don't own the footpath nor is it mentioned on my deeds, most of the footpath is actually nowhere near my property anyway. Most of the footpath runs between a farmers field and next door golf range It is also used by horse riders who in actual fact should not be using it.

They are also saying I should take out third party insurance even though it doesn't belong to me.

If there are any members with legal knowledge as to how I stand I would be most grateful for advice

Realspeed Ex 2010 Freelander2 GS-e Diesel manual Silver owner

Don't know which department has contacted you, but it might be worth speaking to the Rights of Way Officer, they may be able to offer advice

In the same way that you have done, maybe the council are looking at their deeds and seeing that they dont own the land either ... leaving them thinking that beyond maintaining the right of way for a footpath ( i.e. not much more than a footpath and not the size of a tarmac'ed road ) its not their responsibility, and have assumed that as the metalled road leads to a stops at your house, that the road surface is your responsibility ( and all that goes with it ).

The next logical thought is if its not yours, and not the councils, then whose land is it .... is it the farmers land that the footpath is actually on ? ... historically, the bulk of land in a place like you describe would have been the farmers to divvy up, and a house like your's would have in its deeds a right of access across that land to the house. What do your deeds say in that respect.

By definition, what you describe is a road:

https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-2...nd-the-law

However, this page is really interesting regarding adopted roads and probably answers a lot of your questions once you find the status of your road/path/access ...

http://www3.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/at...27&e=e

toeknee wrote:

Don't know which department has contacted you, but it might be worth speaking to the Rights of Way Officer, they may be able to offer advice

he is the guy causing all the trouble

Click image to enlarge

THE LANE IN QUESTION. MY PLACE IS BEHIND THE TREES BEHIND THE LARGE FIELD ON THE RIGHT

Realspeed Ex 2010 Freelander2 GS-e Diesel manual Silver owner

Where's that Doctor when you need him?  Past: FL2 TD4 HSE Auto
Evoque SD4 Dynamic Lux Auto
Present: Audi A3 S Line.

You can't be responsible for something you don't own and therefore don't control. That said, as regards your access road where it runs along the right of way. You have adapted it to your uses. The Council are merely putting you on notice that they won't accept responsibility for the use of it that results in accidents.

If you are not the Landowner you have no legal responsibility for the footpath and as such have no responsibility for it's upkeep.
If it is a legally defined footpath and recorded on the local Definitive Map retained by the County Council it is the responsibility of the County Council to maintain it. If they deem it necessary to have third Party Insurance cover on it it is their responsibility to provide that cover.
"Somebody" will own the legal title to the land and as such will be the Landowner if necessary it will be the responsibility of the County Council to investigate this further and find out who the Landowner is and then deal with them not you. It shouldn't be too dificult to find out the ownership.
It's either shown on your title deeds or it isn't.
Do you have Legal Protection Cover as part of your House Insurance Policy if so it is time to use it.
If not I would be inclined to write to the Chief Executive of the County Council refering to any correspondence you have received and indicating that as you are not the Landowner of the Public Footpath in question you have no Legal responsibility for it and as such you would be obliged if any further correspondence regarding the matter could be directed at the Landowner.
If no correspondence has been received from the County Council and all your discussions to date have been verbal just ignore them and suggest they write to you formally.

Looking at it from Google maps that is an old lane or drove way that continues on way past your place In fact I think it linked up with Jacobs hill lane at the other end. It looks more like it has been left to shrink down to a footpath with the hedges growing in on it, it may be a green lane adapted to a footpath, it does not cross fields as such as footpaths by tradition linked places by the straightest line and went across fields rather than navigated around them and is in its own right a separate piece of land. Needs a ROW expert

Ben (GONE) FL2 2008 SE (manual) Santorini Black, the expensive one
(LEFT WITH) 300tdi Defender 90 the cold, reliable & sensible one

Rights of way are peculiar legally. You can have two or more opinions, but it would need to be settled by a court. Sometimes it's not worth the battle.

You need to contact the Land Registry and ask them who it belongs too, they are the only ones who really know.

As has been said, RoW laws can be complicated, and common sense doesn't always apply! You really need a proper legal opinion (and that's definitely not me!), but questions which might be worth asking include:

Who tarmaced the lane, and who has been maintaining it until now?

If the council, does that constitute/imply 'adoption'?

If so, what are the legal implications of the adoption (or otherwise)?

If not the council, are there any legal implications for whoever has been maintaining it?

Do you have any legal right of access to your property via the lane?

Could the council remove your access, making it illegal for you to drive to your property?

Is it worth getting into a fight with the council given the potential costs and implications?

Sounds like a job for Doc... or the boys  Iain

Greetings. I can give preliminary advice here before further research at a convenient moment.

Don't get bogged down in 'not my land' arguments. You do not have to own the land to be liable to visitors under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 or trespassers under the Occupiers Liability Act 1984.

The fact you use the land to get to your home may well be enough to class you as an occupier. Under the 1957 Act however, people using the land as a right of way/public footpath etc are not a visitor of the occupier and no duty of care/liability is owed to such persons. In respect of non visitiors under the 1984 Act, the right of way that someone may exercise under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 ought not to place undue burden on the occupier (financial or otherwise).

The Acts I mentioned are rather complex to read but I hope that gives a satisfactory summary. Whilst I won't profess to provide a definitive answer on the council charging you for repairs they carry out, I would love to know, in view of the above, what their legal authority would be for doing so. You owe no right under the 1957 Act to people using that public footpath. My educated guess would be not a chance in hell

If someone did trip and wanted to sue, that would leave them with the tort of negligence. They must then show a duty of care owed by you, duty breached and breach caused the loss. Once again, in view of the above and the fact that the council have said they may get involved in work on this public footpath, I would argue that any duty would more likely than not be owed by the council.

Hope that helps. LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey

Last edited by The Doctor on 31st May 2013 12:53 pm. Edited 2 times in total

Just to clarify, the 1984 Act refers to people that are not visitors of the occupier, not just trespassers. LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey

At long last I have satisfied my curiosity on this subject. What I stated earlier was off the top of my head from a subject covered 4 years ago but I have just read my lecture booklet again. The basic outline above is ok but the authority of
Wheat v E Lacon Co Ltd [1996] AC 522 is crucial. Here, Lord Denning stated: "Wherever a person has a sufficient degree of control over premises...then he is an occupier..."

With that in mind, you wouldn't even fall under the OLA 57 or 84 without 'control'. Also, as I said earlier, people exercising a right of way are not visitors under the 57 Act and nor do they fall under the 84 Act. Exercising a private right of way is covered by the 84 Act.

Time to throw down the gauntlet and write to the council and demand to know quite simply what legal authority they have to support their stance.

P.S, with regard to negligence, I do not see how it would be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care on you if someone were to sue. No control or say in matters of that land. Duty of care on the council seems far more likely.

Keep me posted LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey