Judge tells widow, 73, to drop ‘obsessed’ 20-year border dispute with her neighbors

A judge has asked an elderly widow to give up an “obsessive” 20-year battle over a garden fence that has caused more than £100,000 in court bills and caused her and her neighbors “misery”.

Norma Yozin-Smith, 73, claimed the fence between her home and neighbors Anthony and Julie Alexander in New Barnet, north London, got into her garden and severed some of her trees and shrubs when it was put up.

She had claimed the fence ignored a boundary line set by a surveyor over the boundary between their properties after five years of disputes between neighbors starting in 2002.

But after a trial in Central London County Court, Judge Alan Johns has thrown out the main body of Ms Yozin-Smith’s case, dismissing claims that the boundary was mismarked. She had also claimed her neighbors had undermined her patio foundations through repeated use of a blast spray – another claim dismissed by the judge.

The dispute has already cost well over £100,000 in court costs and Judge Roberts then “begged” the pensioner to give up her fight, which he said has “brought misery to her and her neighbours”.

Ms Yozin-Smith has also previously sued the Alexanders over alleged leaks from their swimming pool, a claim that was ‘cancelled’ due to delay in August 2021.

The plots in the middle of a frontier row in Barnet, north London – the row has netted more than £100,000 in court bills

Julie and Anthony Alexander outside Central London County Court after the hearing

Norma Yozin-Smith, who was involved in a court battle with her neighbors

The Alexanders moved to Lyonsdown Road, New Barnet, in 1998 and raised their family on a quiet and leafy street in north London, where houses are now selling for up to £1million.

Mrs. Yozin-Smith moved in next door six months ago.

The “long-running saga” surrounding the neighbors’ boundary began in 2002, when both households began fighting over the exact dividing point between their gardens, but to resolve the dispute, in 2007 they hired a professional surveyor to establish the boundary line.

The surveyor spoke to both households and prepared a report and a closing letter before “marking the boundary on the ground,” the judge said.

Soon after, the Alexanders erected a new fence along part of the new boundary line.

The Alexanders claimed that this should have been the end of the rift as both sides had agreed to accept the surveyor’s decision, but Ms. Yozin-Smith eventually sued on the grounds that the final boundary line contradicted the recommendations in the surveyor’s letter .

She claimed that trees, plants and features belonging to her ended up on the Alexanders side of the fence because the line on the ground was in the wrong place.

In court, however, the couple denied the fence invaded the pensioner’s property, insisting they “bent over” to placate her.

Judge Johns said in his decision: “All domestic border disputes are regrettable, but this one is more regrettable than most.

“It continues, although it was already resolved by a boundary agreement 15 years ago, when both sides agreed to be bound by the determination of their shared boundary by a surveyor – who revised his views on the boundary in a February 9, 2007 report by letter dated February 15.

“It seems to me that Ms. Yozin-Smith has long been obsessed with this boundary. It’s an obsession that has brought suffering to her and her neighbors.

‘I beg you to give it up and move on for your own good and that of Alexander’s.’

The Alexanders erected a new fence along part of the new boundary line

He further noted that the marked boundary line faithfully reflected the surveyor’s report, adding: “I completely disagree with your claim that the line marked on the ground did not reflect the February 9 report.

“But while I have dismissed your case on the location of the border, I think it is important that an explanation be given to provide certainty.

“It follows that the agreed boundary line is represented by the line marked on the surveyor’s digital plan.

“I will explain this and ask that Ms. Yozin-Smith abide by this decision.”

His verdict was the latest chapter in a “long-running saga” of disharmony between neighbors that included Ms Yozin-Smith, who previously sued the Alexanders over alleged leaks from their swimming pool.

Her pool leakage claim was ‘cancelled’ due to a delay in August 2021.

“It’s a saga that goes on, although – as I see it – the Alexanders have done everything in their power to avoid this dispute and the efforts of the surveyor,” the judge said.

Ms Yozin-Smith had claimed that trees, plants and features belonging to her ended up on the Alexanders side of the fence because the line on the ground was in the wrong place

However, Judge Johns found that part of the Alexanders’ fence was leaning into Mrs Yozin-Smith’s garden due to dilapidation and legally constituted a “nuisance”, although the Alexanders had accepted this and agreed to carry out repairs.

And he went on to note that her fence at the front of her house also partially encroached on Mrs Yozin-Smith’s property, commenting: ‘I find encroaching up to half the width of some posts is troublesome’.

He refused to order an injunction against the Alexanders forcing them to fix their front fence, but said Ms Yozin-Smith should be entitled to a “modest sum” in compensation.

“I’m thinking of a £500 reward,” he told the court.

Judge Johns also noted that there were “isolated” instances of trespassing by the Alexanders as they crossed to fix their fence.

He dismissed another part of Ms. Yozin-Smith’s lawsuit, which alleged her neighbors undermined her patio foundations through repeated use of a jet spray in her 200-foot yard.

The long-running dispute has resulted in massive court bills, and a decision on who will bear the costs of the most recent leg of the lawsuit will be made by the judge at a later date.

Source: | This article originally belongs to Dailymail.co.uk