Rights of Access · Report on Title scenario
A right of way does not lapse because nobody uses it. The deeds record a right for the neighbouring properties to cross the rear of this property, and the fact that the route has been fenced off for years does not remove it. Extinguishing a documented right takes a formal agreement, or abandonment — and abandonment means clear evidence that the neighbours meant to give the right up, which is a high bar.
From the e-ROT archive
This scenario is drawn from Report on Title material dealing with this specific circumstance.
The right lives in the deeds. A wall, a fence or a shed sitting across the route changes what is happening on the ground and not what is recorded on the title, and a buyer who sees an enclosed garden may have no idea the right exists.
That is why this comes as a surprise: everything visible says the access is finished, and the only place the truth is recorded is in documents most people never read.
If a right you did not know about is being claimed over your land, what was reported to you about the title during the purchase is where the question starts.
Find out what should have been explained → WhenIBought.com<b>A formal release.</b> The neighbours entitled to the right agree, in a deed, to give it up. Clean, permanent, and dependent on their cooperation — which may come at a price.
<b>Abandonment.</b> Disuse over a substantial period together with clear evidence that the neighbours intended to relinquish the right. Intention is the difficult part: not using something is not the same as deciding to give it up, and the courts have been reluctant to find abandonment on disuse alone.
Neither of those happens by itself, and neither has happened here.
A neighbour could seek to re-establish the right, and if a dispute reached court, the court could order it reinstated — including removing whatever is obstructing it and restoring the route.
That is the exposure in practical terms: not a theoretical blot on the title but the possibility of having to take down a structure and give up part of a garden you thought was yours.
If you are buying, the questions are how long the obstruction has been there, whether any neighbour has ever objected or asked, whether the neighbouring properties have any other access to their gardens, and whether anybody has ever tried to get a release. The last of those matters most: an approach that was refused tells you the right is still valued.
From the e-ROT archive
Report on Title paragraph
It is important to highlight that, notwithstanding the physical obstruction and apparent disuse of the access route, the legal right of way remains effective unless formally extinguished through legal agreement or abandonment over a substantial period accompanied by clear evidence of the neighbouring owners’ intention to relinquish their rights.
Given the continued existence of this right of way, there is a potential risk that neighbouring property owners may seek to re-establish their rights in the future. Should a dispute arise, the court may order that the right of way be reinstated, which could require the removal of the current obstruction and restoration of the access route.
Master precedent wording. This is current Lexsure Report on Title material, reproduced exactly. It describes the position on one property's deeds; what any particular right permits depends on how it was granted. It is not advice about any particular property.
Do not rely on wording copied or saved from this page. Get the current wording dealing with this scenario.
View current paragraph →Keep relevant ROT wording under review as Lexsure issues updates.
View Notification Service →