Many disputes between neighbours arise as a consequence of imprecise property boundaries and uncertainty as to ownership of land.

Boundary encroachments come in different shapes and sizes, some are more serious than others are but all can lead to neighbours falling out: They may take one of the following forms: a dispute over ownership of part of your property; boundary walls or hedges either mistakenly or deliberately being built or planted in the wrong place; your neighbour unlawfully using part of your land to gain access to his; neighbouring pipes, drains or cables running over or under your land without consent; or overhanging bushes or trees or tree roots damaging the foundation of your house.

It may be obvious to you that there has been an encroachment especially if it first takes place while you are living at the property. However, where you are buying a house it may be more difficult to spot.

Sometimes existing features on the ground such as historical boundary markers or the remains of old fencing will give you a clue as to possible encroachments.

Often the only way to tell is to have a surveyor stake the boundaries in accordance with the property description and any plans with the deeds to the house.

The obligation is then on the seller to rectify the defect in his title. If he cannot do so you may well want to walk away from the purchase of the property, in which case the survey fee will have been well spent.

If you accept the property with the defect you run the risk of being time barred from taking any action.

In the case of boundary disputes that involve the loss of land the period within which action must be taken is 20 years from the date of the encroachment. If no action is taken within that period then the owner's right to the land is extinguished.

It is possible to show that a neighbour's right to use a piece of land, or to cross a piece of land, could be revoked at any time provided that you can show that this was always the intention of the parties. It is wise to record that intention in writing in case there is ever a dispute over what was agreed.

Where it is obvious that there is an encroachment then the first priority is to try to avoid litigation by negotiating with your neighbour to remove the intrusion and by trying to keep matters on an amicable footing.

It may be that it is a genuine error or there may be a discrepancy in either or both of your deeds that has led to this situation.

In such a case you may be able to agree some form of restitution for the loss of the land.

This will save you the cost of going to Court, and will also avoid the bad feelings that may make living in close proximity to your neighbour a miserable experience.

If you do have to go to Court it is important that you put together any evidence that you have about where the boundary line used to be.

The deeds to your property might assist, as might historical records.

Previous owners of the house or other neighbours may be able to help by swearing affidavits outlining their understanding of the true position.

By way of contrast it may be that you have acquired some land that is not on your deeds, and that this land has belonged to the property for over 20 years.

In any dispute it is important to obtain third party evidence that this has been the position for this length of time to support your claim.

Again previous owners or other longstanding neighbours might have the requisite knowledge and be able to swear an affidavit to that effect.

If you are able to prove use of the land without let or hindrance for this period of time then you have gained what is known as a `prescriptive right' to the land i.e. a right to the land by reason of lapse of time.

Where the land previously belonged to the Government, for example it is part of the foreshore, then the time that needs to have elapsed since it was first used without let or hindrance is 60 years. Where the issue of boundary encroachment remains unresolved it may put a blot on the land which makes it both unmarketable and difficult to raise money on.

Neither a purchaser nor a lender is going to be taken with the prospect of expensive litigation in the foreseeable future.

However, as a seller it is dangerous to ignore the problem or to try and hide it as this may give the purchaser a right to back out of the agreement and to sue for his expenses once the issue comes to light.

It is better to be honest about any difficulties at the outset and to take your attorney's advice on the best way to resolve the problem.

*** Attorney Martin Mitchell is a member of the Property Department at Appleby Spurling & Kempe. You can write to him with your questions or comments at mmitchell y ask.bm. Copies of Mr. Mitchell's columns can be obtained on the Appleby Spurling & Kempe web site at www.ask.bm.

*** This column should not be used as a substitute for professional legal advice.

Before proceeding with any matters discussed here, persons are advised to consult with a lawyer.