Land Ownership - River Bank - Legal Question

[Martin Salisbury]

I have a legal question for you to see if all your opinions/understanding matches mine. I admit that I am being lazy and could go and research the definitive answer (but that would be too easy and I know Phil Dean will give me the answer anyway!)

 

I've got my views and will try and keep it to myself for now to stop me influencing your answers.

 

The issues in question relate to a house that owns land up to the riverbank. Can you tell me:

 

1. Where in fact does the boundary end in relation to the river?

2. Does it matter where the boundary line is marked on the deed plan (bit of a clue why I'm asking there!)

3. If the land is registered land does that effect where the boundary lies? ie is it where the boundary line is on the land registry plan or where it is on the original deed or somewhere else?

4. What fishing rights would you have?

5. What rights would you have to take any fish?

6. Any other points that should be considered (and yes I have got buy a rod licence!)

 

I look forward to input from anyone. Should get your brain cells ticking over anyway.

 

Thanks

 

Martin

[northern mark]

A lad I used to fish with was looking at buying a house that backed onto a river. He was told that the property boundary was midway across the river unless the deeds say different.

 

Probably no help but at least you will be able to compare it to your own thoughts

 

Mark

[chesters1]

its the deeds ,we found after moving (the new owner found the problem) that a bit of "our" garden actually wasnt and the neighbour didnt know either

on the land registary it was ours and within the stated boundary,the measuring tape is the key a farmer kept getting complaints from a householder that his (the farmers) lorry kept encrouching on this chaps boundary and took legal action the deeds came out as did the tapes and not only wasnt the farmer encrouching on this chaps boundary the farmer actually owned 10 feet of this chaps garden

 

[ 05. August 2004, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: chesters1 ]

[Mister Toad]

I don't know if this helps but I was looking at the Land Registery website recently and if I remember correctly, it stated that the maps held by the Land Registery are not definitive and that you need to refer to the deeds for the exact location of the boundary. You also have to be careful where things like hedges and fences are concerned as sometimes the boundary is one side or the other or may even be down the middle.

[Peter Waller]

My understanding is that you own to the middle of a river unless the deeds say otherwise. It is not impossible that the fishing or game rights have been sold as a separate entity on a previous occasion so, once again, its down to the deeds.

 

However, if like me, your land goes under a navigable river, then anyone, you included(!), can fish it quite freely. You can, if you have a bad attitude, prevent anyone anchoring or laying tackle on your 'land', but not actually fishing!

 

Far from straight forward!

[Bruno Broughton]

Peter is almost exactly correct.

 

If the ownership of the river banks AND the fishing rights were sold or acquired together (legally, the 'corporeal' position), you have the legal rights of ownership of the river bed - and the fishing rights - to the mid-line. It doesn't matter that the landowners adjacent or opposite may have stocked fish; if you catch them on 'your' bit of river, you take them into your possession and can do what you see fit with them. Note that in fact you have no legal rights to fish past the mid-line, so far bank fishing is really illegal. But the common view is that as this could happen in reverse (the owner opposite fishing on 'your' side), it's sort of give and take.

 

However, if the land rights and the sporting rights were sold separately (the 'incorporeal' position), you could have (i) the rights to fish but no rights of access onto the banks, or (ii) ownership of the land but no rights to fish there.

 

The course of a river can move, naturally, and the land and sporting (in this case, angling) rights move with it if the changes are gradual. This is why a definitive map cannot be drawn because it would become out of date as the river develops bends through the process of bank erosion and silt deposition.

 

Interestingly, a SUDDEN change in the course of a river is treated differently, and here the land and sporting rights remain fixed in position, as were. This can lead to really wierd situations where someone owns a short stretch of the former banks and bed in a river, and the rights to fish there, surrounded by someone else's land. (There are bits of the lower Trent like this).

 

A deeds search should confirm it one way or another. Best advice is: never, ever purchase or lease the fishing rights to a section of river unless you are 100% legally sure that (a) the person selling/leasing them actually owns them, and ( you have the rights of access to them.

 

[ 05. August 2004, 11:42 PM: Message edited by: Bruno Broughton ]

[Martin Salisbury]

Come on Phil Dean I was relying on you, can you top Bruno's answer?

 

I think not!

 

Thanks everyone for your help.