Winning friends and influencing people Network Rail style. Using other people's property/causing prolonged disruption, legal threats, no agreed compo

[Wolfie]

Homeowners refusing to give up backyards to Network Rail track upgrade

Huddersfield residents including Terry Binns (pictured), 69, are demanding £10,000 for losing use of their gardens. Locals will see a chunk of their space cut away completely.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Angry residents are demanding £10,000 compensation from Network Rail for losing the use of their gardens during a two-year track upgrade scheme.

Homes in Glenfield Avenue, Huddersfield, have been ordered to allow workers access to their back gardens overlooking the main Transpennine railway line.

Not only will the work cause dust and noise but the residents will see a chunk of their gardens cut away completely by the construction work before being reinstated at a later date.

Householders in 14 terraced houses have signed a petition calling for workers to stay out of their gardens unless a payment of £10,000 can be agreed.

But with no agreement in place both parties are refusing to give ground.

Only one side of the story being reported but if there is any truth in what is said about how Network Rail are operating then to be blunt they deserve all of the grief that they will doubtless get.

 

[lachlan]

Are there any sources outside of the Daily Mail?

 

[yorksrob]

Would the same not apply if we were dualling an A road somewhere ?

Would the Daily Mail be reporting if people were up in arms about that ?

 

[Taunton]

£10k is nothing. Their homes would be unsellable during this time.

Used to be four tracks here, nowadays two. However can the engineers take so long to reinstate what was previously there, now just overgrown. Sounds like the engineer is taking the cheapest way out, inconvenience to lineside neighbours be blowed.

 

[Geeves]

I think the issue is the embankment will need to be regraded and obviously the forest that has grown will need to be removed, all the gardens currently ending in an unofficial nature reserve

At a rough guess Id say the houses sit around 20 to 30ft higher than the railway. Lilac Crescent seems to be well into the railway land so that will be interesting

 

[30907]

I think the issue is the embankment will need to be regraded and obviously the forest that has grown will need to be removed, all the gardens currently ending in an unofficial nature reserve

At a rough guess Id say the houses sit around 20 to 30ft higher than the railway. Lilac Crescent seems to be well into the railway land so that will be interesting

At Lilac Court there looks to be sufficient railway land opposite to avoid demolishing houses - opposite Glenfield Ave there is an industrial building which abuts railway property which presumably makes additional land take undesirable (aka expensive).

 

[The exile]

Can’t believe that NR would be “ordering” people to give up their land without compensation (even temporarily) unless they had the legal right to do so, or that the home owners would simply be demanding compensation unless they knew they were on shaky ground. (No pun intended). Still sounds like a PR disaster in the making - whatever the legal position.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

Reminds me of a job I did as an Assistant Resident Engineer, working for British Rail. We "borrowed" a length of back garden from each of a row of about 20 terraced houses, atop a retaining wall which needed reconstruction. It was all arranged by agreements negotiated by the BR Property Board. Each householder had their own signed document which laid out the compensation they would receive.

Not only that, but to smooth the way, the Property Board (bless them) had included a clause which said BR would reinstate the gardens exactly to their former state. Guess who got the job of finding the precise species, variety and size of rosebush, tree and shrub and constructing a garden shed for one of the homeowners who originated from Jamaica and had built the original to withstand hurricanes. He provided drawings and he and I spent a jolly morning drinking coffee in his front room while he explained just how it should be done.

It's not difficult to do these things amicably and to everyone's satisfaction. I can't imagine why Network Rail should be facing hostility.

 

[Deepgreen]

This is a bizarre situation, being slightly akin to Network Rail now seemingly being unable to secure access to Altnabreac station on the Far North line meaning it has been closed for months/years. NR unable to secure its estate adequately. On the other hand, I wouldn't believe a word the Daily Mail prints...

 

[Energy]

It's not difficult to do these things amicably and to everyone's satisfaction. I can't imagine why Network Rail should be facing hostility.

I'd be very surprised if NR hadn't agreed to reinstate gardens to the original state. NR has offered compensation but it's about a third of what they want (the article says £4 per day so about £3000 total).

The access is only to cut back vegetation.

Are there any sources outside of the Daily Mail?

Here is it from ITV News.

 

[Falcon1200]

Looking at this from a different angle, should a small group of householders be able to hold Network Rail to ransom and increase the cost, and also possibly delay, a transport project of national importance in order to line their pockets?

 

[HurdyGurdy]

Looking at this from a different angle, should a small group of householders be able to hold Network Rail to ransom and increase the cost, and also possibly delay, a transport project of national importance in order to line their pockets?

Perhaps NR are experiencing hostility because they approached the householders (who are also their neighbours) from precisely that angle.

 

[skyhigh]

Perhaps NR are experiencing hostility because they approached the householders (who are also their neighbours) from precisely that angle.

Perhaps, but we only have one side of the story, and even then not even from a particularly trustworthy source.

 

[a_c_skinner]

NR has powers for emergency repairs, I think, but doesn't this need to be done by negotiation? £10k isn't a lot but a lot less than going to law. Or can they "enforce?"

 

[YorkshireBear]

Don't trust the Daily Mail but equally Network Rail are far from perfect and there is large regional variance in how it deals with neighbours.

 

[tspaul26]

Can’t believe that NR would be “ordering” people to give up their land without compensation (even temporarily) unless they had the legal right to do so

They do have the right - and strictly speaking the householders are not entitled to any payments at all as of right so they are already being offered more than is legally due. They are being obstructive to try to get even more money i.e. make it cheaper to pay them off than to litigate the matter.

NR has powers for emergency repairs, I think, but doesn't this need to be done by negotiation?

There are statutory powers of temporary possession for this project.

 

[Energy]

NR has powers for emergency repairs, I think, but doesn't this need to be done by negotiation? £10k isn't a lot but a lot less than going to law. Or can they "enforce?"

Neither party would go to court, it would cost too much. Looks like it's a waiting game for who will break first.

The ITV News article has them supportive of the rail electrification works, so I think they want more compensation. Remember that the work they require access for is only clearing foliage...

 

[HSTEd]

Looking at this from a different angle, should a small group of householders be able to hold Network Rail to ransom and increase the cost, and also possibly delay, a transport project of national importance in order to line their pockets?

This project isn't really of national importance in any meaningful sense.

 

[deltic]

From reading the ITV story it appears they are mainly complaining about possible noise from the work rather than Network Rail using their gardens. If everyone was compensated for noisy construction work even less would get built in this country than it does now.

 

[ConnectingDots]

This is a bizarre situation, being slightly akin to Network Rail now seemingly being unable to secure access to Altnabreac station on the Far North line meaning it has been closed for months/years. NR unable to secure its estate adequately. On the other hand, I wouldn't believe a word the Daily Mail prints...

Network Rail don't have any access problem with Altnabreac whatsoever, they just DO NOT own the land there, surprised no one has figured this out by now?
Network Rails excuse of not being able to salt the ice is certainly not plausible anymore.

I wonder how people's attitudes would change on this forum if they received letters from Network Work tomorrow saying they are taking your property off you and threatening you with legal action like in Huddersfield?

 

[peterblue]

Depends how long the work will be ongoing for.

Yes, 2 years is quoted but I'm unsure how much of that period requires garden access and how much of that period will necessitate 'noisy' work.

A week or two, maximum, is probably fine and won't cause much disruption to the area.

Howeve , if NR approached me, and claimed to need 2 years unfettered access to my garden and 2 years worth of noise for £3k, then NR would fairly justifiably receive a 2 word reply ending in 'off'.

 

[ConnectingDots]

Maybe we could all chip in to cover the cost of compensation to the Huddersfield residents just to help NR get the job done?. A few hundred quid each should do it, even spread the cost over 2 years with a direct debit. We can all be happy then, Who's in?

 

[Andyh82]

This was the lead story on tonight’s Calendar by the way, so if you want to have a watch, the link is here

https://www.itv.com/watch/news/catch-up-on-itv-calendar-north-from-wednesday-may-15th/mnf9bwl

 

[Wolfie]

They do have the right - and strictly speaking the householders are not entitled to any payments at all as of right so they are already being offered more than is legally due. They are being obstructive to try to get even more money i.e. make it cheaper to pay them off than to litigate the matter.


There are statutory powers of temporary possession for this project.

Temporary possession yes perhaps under current law, but who defines "temporary" and is said law ECHR-compliant? I believe that significantly impairing someone's living conditions can be a tort too.

Oh and you better believe that Network Rail are liable to restore any damage done to the property which is the subject of said temporary possession.

Depends how long the work will be ongoing for.

Yes, 2 years is quoted but I'm unsure how much of that period requires garden access and how much of that period will necessitate 'noisy' work.

A week or two, maximum, is probably fine and won't cause much disruption to the area.

Howeve , if NR approached me, and claimed to need 2 years unfettered access to my garden and 2 years worth of noise for £3k, then NR would fairly justifiably receive a 2 word reply ending in 'off'.

Absolutely.

 

[Bald Rick]

I do hope that all the ‘reopening lines’ proponents are taking note. Building railways is not easy, even when you already own the land!

 

[tspaul26]

Temporary possession yes perhaps under current law, but who defines "temporary"

The period ends no later than one year after the date of completion of the relevant work. It’s all set out in article 34 of the order.

is said law ECHR-compliant?

Yes, and even if it wasn’t then it’s far out of time for any legal challenge to the order’s validity.

I believe that significantly impairing someone's living conditions can be a tort too.

Not if authorised by statute, which this is.

Oh and you better believe that Network Rail are liable to restore any damage done to the property which is the subject of said temporary possession.

What damage?

And has Network Rail actually said or done anything to indicate that the compensation would not be paid if there was such damage?

Not that Network Rail is required to reinstate the land completely in any event.

 

[John R]

Given NR’s comment about needing to “exercise its powers under the Order” it sounds as though the Transport & Works Act Order which the Sec of State gave approval for after going through due process (including a Public Inquiry) gave them the right to possess the land for the period required. Which is what I would expect, as those Orders cover the need for temporary possession, and are I believe very specific as to the plots of land needed.

So I would have thought their complaint should have been raised during the PI.

 

[yorksrob]

Network Rail don't have any access problem with Altnabreac whatsoever, they just DO NOT own the land there, surprised no one has figured this out by now?
Network Rails excuse of not being able to salt the ice is certainly not plausible anymore.

I wonder how people's attitudes would change on this forum if they received letters from Network Work tomorrow saying they are taking your property off you and threatening you with legal action like in Huddersfield?

To be honest, if they wanted to borrow part of my garden for £10k, I'd be quite happy (though I'd be prepared to hold out for a bit more).

 

[Magdalia]

Given NR’s comment about needing to “exercise its powers under the Order” it sounds as though the Transport & Works Act Order which the Sec of State gave approval for after going through due process (including a Public Inquiry) gave them the right to possess the land for the period required. Which is what I would expect, as those Orders cover the need for temporary possession, and are I believe very specific as to the plots of land needed.

So I would have thought their complaint should have been raised during the PI.

A Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO) inquiry was held see the Network Rail website here:

Huddersfield to Westtown (Dewsbury) - Network Rail

We’re proposing an upgrade to a section of railway between Huddersfield and Westtown to deliver passenger benefits along the railway.

www.networkrail.co.uk

We’re proposing an upgrade to a section of railway between Huddersfield and Westtown (Dewsbury) to deliver passenger benefits along the Transpennine railway.​

The TWAO order was granted on 27 June 2022 here:

Huddersfield to Westtown (Dewsbury) improvements: Transport and Works Act order

Approval to confer powers on Network Rail for capacity and improvement works on the Transpennine Line between Huddersfield and Westtown (Dewsbury).

www.gov.uk

Approval to confer powers on Network Rail for capacity and improvement works on the Transpennine Line between Huddersfield and Westtown (Dewsbury).

I haven't looked at all of the documentation for this TWAO in detail, but I did follow the Cambridge South TWAO process quite closely. A lot of it was about permanent and temporary acquisition of land, and maintenance of access. In the Cambridge South case, residential properties were not affected, the impact was mostly on big organisations that could afford expert legal advice. Practically and financially it would be difficult for residents to engage with the process in the same way.

 

[tspaul26]

Practically and financially it would be difficult for residents to engage with the process in the same way.

And even if they had, it would almost certainly make no difference.

The point of these statutory orders is to enable development to come forward more easily, not to empower objectors.