Hypotheticals by Manny Wood. Published in the Coffs Coast Advocate on 16 July 2016.
Martha is a widowed aged pensioner and homeowner.
Martha’s neighbour, Gillian, writes her a letter stating that she is unhappy with the condition of the fence between the two properties and wants to have it replaced.
Gillian states that she wants to build a rather expensive timber fence and demands that Martha contributes to half of the total cost.
”Martha finds Gillian’s demands quite upsetting and given her limited budget, is worried that she cannot afford to contribute” to the high cost of Gillian’s preferred fence.
Martha takes photographs of the current fence and takes them to her solicitor.
Martha’s solicitor informs her that under the Dividing Fences Act, a fence only needs to be a “sufficient” dividing fence, which means a fence that is similar to other fences in the neighbourhood and a fence that is not unreasonably expensive.
Martha’s solicitor also advises her that the factors a Court or Tribunal would take into account, if there is a dispute about a standard of a proposed fence, include –
- The standard of the existing fence
- The way in which the land on either side is used
- Privacy
- The kinds of dividing fences usual in the area
- Local council policies including height
After speaking with her solicitor, Martha approaches Gillian and informs her of the advice that she has received. Martha explains that the fence proposed by Gillian is very expensive and is not the kind of dividing fence usual in the area and as such, they should be looking at a less expensive fence.
Initially, Martha and Gillian are not able to reach an agreement, but after participating in a free mediation service, conducted by the local Community Justice Centre, they are able to reach a compromise without the intervention of the court. They decide on a type of fence that is within Martha’s budget and the fence is constructed at their joint expense.
