Couple lose life savings in row over fence in at Snettisham

But its neighbours might not agree after a legal row with a former neighbour over a few yards of fencing cost them their life savings before she passed away and her house went up for sale.

Graham and Katherine Bateson say they have sunk £45,000 into lawyers' fees since their late neighbour Wendy Leedham placed the fence alongside the drive of their bungalow at Snettisham, near King's Lynn, in 2019.

Graham and Katherine Bateson outside their bungalow (Image: Chris Bishop)

The couple sought an injunction to have it taken down, saying it obstructed the entrance to the drive of their property.

The couple argued when they bought their two-bedroom house on Brent Avenue for £29,500 in 1987, they were told it shared a drive with their neighbour, while a so-called featureless boundary existed between the two which should not be built on.

But their neighbour obtained legal advice saying she could put the fence up.

The fence at the centre of the dispute (Image: Supplied by the Batesons)

Litigation dragged on for three years until November, 2021, when the case went to a mediation hearing, which ruled a new deed should be drawn up showing the boundary between the two properties aligned with the fence, meaning it could stay.

"We'd lived here 32 years without any problems with the previous neighbours, they all agreed it was a shared drive," said Mrs Bateson, a 73-year-old retired factory supervisor.

"We bought it as a shared drive, that's how it was explained to us and sold to us.

The boundary between the two properties after the fence was taken down by Mr Bateson (Image: Chris Bishop)

"I don't understand how you can have all the checks done legally and 30 years later it comes back and bites you on the bum.

"To have all your life savings taken away like that, when you knew you were right in the first place."

READ MORE: Fears for whale seen off Snettisham Beach

READ MORE: Villagers vote to thin out Snettisham's feral chickens

READ MORE: Future of Snettisham sea defences revealed

The deed drawn up after the mediation hearing (Image: Supplied)

Wendy Leedham did not live to see the outcome. She passed away months before the hearing in May, 2021, at the age of 74.

But her family kept up the fight to retain the fence. The structure extended a smaller fence consisting of just three panels, which the Batesons had agreed a previous neighbour could install in 1995 to prevent her children from running out onto the road. 

Ms Leedham's three-bed former home is now on the market for £375,000 with agents Sowerbys.

The firm says: "This chalet bungalow, surprisingly spacious, occupies a serene spot at the end of a quiet cul-de-sac."

Ms Leedham's former home is now up for sale (Image: Chris Bishop)

Sowerbys' 12-page brochure makes no mention of the fence or the boundary dispute and the Batesons fear a new owner could replace it.

"We're still living in fear they will put another fence up when there shouldn't have been one in the first place," said Mrs Bateson.

The Batesons say the shared drive and open boundary was later confirmed by a surveyor's report after the mediation hearing.

Retired window cleaner Mr Bateson, 75, took the law into his own hands in September, 2022.

The fence between the two properties before it was removed (Image: Supplied by the Batesons)

"I took the fence down and I got arrested for criminal damage," he said.

"They had me locked up for 12 hours on a Sunday with no food until midnight."

Last December, the charge was dropped because the Crown Prosecution Service deemed it was not in the public interest to proceed.

Mr Bateson said by then, the couple could not continue their legal fight because they could no longer afford to, having already spent £45,000.

The boundary between the two properties (Image: Chris Bishop)

"We saved and worked hard," he said. "It's all gone now."

Both parties paid their own legal costs. The fence has not been rebuilt, while the Land Registry has rejected the revised deed because if was not happy with the way the Batesons' signatures were witnessed.

Sowerby's and Mrs Leedham's family were contacted for comment.