ᐅ The post of our driveway gate extends about 10 cm onto the neighboring property.
Created on: 29 Jun 2020 20:33
M
Medvedev
Hello friends,
I’m new here and hope that this is the right forum area for my concern and that you can help me.
We own a two-family house in Cologne, where we live as a family. Our future neighbor has had the neighboring house demolished and is now building new on the property. We have owned our house since 1995. Our house was built in 1984. We have a driveway gate with two masonry pillars.
The architect of our future neighbor verbally informed us today that he intends to build a 1.5 m (5 feet) high wall on our property line. For this purpose, he has already had an existing wooden fence, which belonged to us, removed without our consent. When we addressed this, he said he thought the fence belonged to the client, his principal.
He now also claims that the masonry pillar of our driveway gate (seen from the street on the left) is built about 10 cm (4 inches) onto the property of our future neighbor and must therefore be cut back or removed so that a flush wall can be erected.
The same applies to three wooden posts of our carport, which also protrude about 10 cm (4 inches) onto the neighbor’s property on the side.
Both would have to be dismantled as soon as possible, at our expense, so that construction can continue.
He said he would provide us with his demands in writing, which we would then have to sign accordingly.
Until now, we have always assumed that our gate pillar fully stands within our property boundaries (40 x 40 cm (16 x 16 inches)).
As proof, the architect handed us a copy of a city-approved drawing from Cologne (stamped), which is supposed to show that the pillar and posts protrude onto the neighboring property.
However, the pillar and posts in question are not marked on the site plan.
According to what I found online, a neighbor’s right regarding dismantling or similar claims expires after three years. What do you think about this?
Hopefully, you can give us some expert advice. We are grateful for your help!
Best regards,
Medvedev
I’m new here and hope that this is the right forum area for my concern and that you can help me.
We own a two-family house in Cologne, where we live as a family. Our future neighbor has had the neighboring house demolished and is now building new on the property. We have owned our house since 1995. Our house was built in 1984. We have a driveway gate with two masonry pillars.
The architect of our future neighbor verbally informed us today that he intends to build a 1.5 m (5 feet) high wall on our property line. For this purpose, he has already had an existing wooden fence, which belonged to us, removed without our consent. When we addressed this, he said he thought the fence belonged to the client, his principal.
He now also claims that the masonry pillar of our driveway gate (seen from the street on the left) is built about 10 cm (4 inches) onto the property of our future neighbor and must therefore be cut back or removed so that a flush wall can be erected.
The same applies to three wooden posts of our carport, which also protrude about 10 cm (4 inches) onto the neighbor’s property on the side.
Both would have to be dismantled as soon as possible, at our expense, so that construction can continue.
He said he would provide us with his demands in writing, which we would then have to sign accordingly.
Until now, we have always assumed that our gate pillar fully stands within our property boundaries (40 x 40 cm (16 x 16 inches)).
As proof, the architect handed us a copy of a city-approved drawing from Cologne (stamped), which is supposed to show that the pillar and posts protrude onto the neighboring property.
However, the pillar and posts in question are not marked on the site plan.
According to what I found online, a neighbor’s right regarding dismantling or similar claims expires after three years. What do you think about this?
Hopefully, you can give us some expert advice. We are grateful for your help!
Best regards,
Medvedev
P
pagoni20204 Oct 2021 10:51I wouldn’t say I can see it that loosely; that’s not what I mean. However, I try not to let it become a frustrating issue, especially since it can be changed anyway. Good neighborly relations are priceless, and if he also recognizes his own responsibility, that would already be very positive for me. Whether I would actually want or demand a change, I’m not sure. For me, it’s always about the how.
For me, it has naturally moved into the background due to other matters... nice plants will then help to disguise it.
For me, it has naturally moved into the background due to other matters... nice plants will then help to disguise it.
Of course, a few square meters become more significant on small plots of land. However, the original poster has come to terms with this, and it does not seem to affect the building process. Therefore, here is my suggestion to keep the ownership boundaries clear on both sides.