RMweb Premium corneliuslundie Posted August 11 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 11 My query was whether the gas, water or telephone company needs my permission to dig up the road on my side. And if so how much can I charge them? Off topic but very interesting. Jonathan 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobby Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 (edited) On a private road then they probably would need permission. I know when I was a kid we owned a house on a private road and were responsible for the bit outside our front (all the houses were on one side) including drains and services. When the fields opposite were built over with a new estate in the mid 60s Dad couldn't wait for the council to adopt the road and remove the financial burden of its upkeep. Most roads are "adopted" and thus their upkeep, and that of the services beneath their surface are the responsibility of the Local Authority who don't have to ask your permission to do such works. Looking at my land deed map it only shows my land stretching to the edge if the pavement, not beyond, so I'm not sure about the accuracy of that earlier link, though to be fair it even admits things aren't that simple in real life Edited August 11 by Hobby Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hodgson Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 3 hours ago, martin_wynne said: Should both residents in the above diagram have garden railways, it would be legal to dig a tunnel under the road to link them. 🙂 Ownership of the tunnel would change at the middle of the road. You'll need something like this if you're not going to dig up the highway https://czxuanxuan.en.made-in-china.com/product/dBSxZCKEysYL/China-Slurry-800mm-Telecoms-Cable-Ducts-Tunnel-Boring-Machine.html 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium martin_wynne Posted August 11 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 11 10 minutes ago, Hobby said: Looking at my land deed map it only shows my land stretching to the edge if the pavement, not beyond, so I'm not sure about the accuracy of that earlier link, though to be fair it even admits things aren't that simple in real life You may still very likely be able to claim ownership of the land below your side of the road. See: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/land-registry-plans-boundaries/land-registry-plans-boundaries-practice-guide-40-supplement-3#legal-presumptions "There are 2 presumptions relating to the ownership of the soil of a roadway (where a road or path is a highway maintainable at the public expense, the surface vests in the highway authority: section 263 of the Highways Act 1980). The first is that the owner of land abutting on a road is also the owner of the adjoining section of the road up to the middle line (ad medium filum). The second is that where a conveyance or transfer of land abutting on a road is made by someone owning land on one side of it only, then if they can be proved or are presumed, to own also the road up to the middle line, this half of the roadway is included in the conveyance or transfer." "Where the boundary is a general boundary, we still try to show the land and its boundaries as accurately as possible. So if a person has grounds for believing a legal presumption operates and the red edging on a title plan ought to include additional land as a result, they may apply for the register to be altered to show the red edging on the plan in a more accurate position." Not that owning the land gets you much further -- unless you want to dig a railway tunnel. 🙂 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEdwardII Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 4 hours ago, martin_wynne said: it would be legal to dig a tunnel under the road to link them It might be legal, but probably unsafe. Goodness knows what utility services are present under the road - gas mains, water mains, sewers, electricity cables, communications cables, etc etc. Slice into one of those and you'll be liable...if still living. Yours, Mike. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEdwardII Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 2 hours ago, corneliuslundie said: whether the gas, water or telephone company needs my permission to dig up the road In a word: no. They have to apply to the highway authority for suitable legal agreement before they put those services in, but once that is done, they have the right to maintain them. They do have to apply to dig up the road - hence all those notices you will find in your local paper - but rarely does such a request get refused, although the highway authority does have power of refusal. Yours, Mike. 2 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium martin_wynne Posted August 11 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 11 9 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said: It might be legal, but probably unsafe. Goodness knows what utility services are present under the road - gas mains, water mains, sewers, electricity cables, communications cables, etc etc. Slice into one of those and you'll be liable...if still living. Yours, Mike. There was a smily on that. This is a model railway forum, I was trying to keep on-topic. 🙂 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEdwardII Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 1 minute ago, martin_wynne said: I was trying to keep on-topic What a quaint notion! 2 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 .... in particular on THIS thread where the last thing we want to talk about is someone being stupid on a level crossing. 6 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted August 14 Share Posted August 14 AHEM ! .......... sorry - but I think we might be happy to discuss this sort of stupidity !! Yes, the old 'road tarmac / road markings over the rails' cliché : East Croydon, 7/8/99 ................ and I know it's not strictly a level crossing ... and the tramway didn't open for another nine months ! 1 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunwurken Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 For those who like me have limited German the long and the short of this is steam train hits lorry on crossing https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/sachsen/dresden/dippoldiswalde-sebnitz/weisseritztalbahn-unfall-lkw-kran-gleis-100~amp.html 2 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 Interesting - it looks like the loco has gone out of its way to collide with the truck ... or at least the truck that's visible in the pictures ! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted August 21 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 21 2 hours ago, dunwurken said: For those who like me have limited German the long and the short of this is steam train hits lorry on crossing https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/sachsen/dresden/dippoldiswalde-sebnitz/weisseritztalbahn-unfall-lkw-kran-gleis-100~amp.html It did better than the steam locomotive in Victoria, Australia, where it hit a grain train, killing 3 on the footplate! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeps Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said: Interesting - it looks like the loco has gone out of its way to collide with the truck ... or at least the truck that's visible in the pictures ! Quite remarkable, particularly as the collision appears to have deposited about a ton of scrap iron on top of the locomotives’ boiler🙂 On a serious note, hopefully no one was injured. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 Nah - that scrap iron was already on the boiler .... Freital Coßmannsdorf ; 30/4/91 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobby Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 At least its easily available for maintenance rather than hiding it away! Nice loco though and 55 tons so no lightweights. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 Does that STOP sign apply to the engine or car ? 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobby Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 Car. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidBird Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 "A tractor hit barriers at Beal Level Crossing" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70j79v9gqvo 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted August 21 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 21 5 hours ago, Deeps said: Quite remarkable, particularly as the collision appears to have deposited about a ton of scrap iron on top of the locomotives’ boiler🙂 On a serious note, hopefully no one was injured. I used Google Translate, there were three people with minor injuries. The loco will cost an estimated £42, 600 to repair. Someone's insurance company will not be happy. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 Five according to my translation ........ as for the loco, I don't think I can see any damage on the right hand side - just the lamps etc. on the front - very odd. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted August 21 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 21 33 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said: Five according to my translation ........ as for the loco, I don't think I can see any damage on the right hand side - just the lamps etc. on the front - very odd. They said the frames might be damaged or cracked and some wheels might need replacing. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted August 22 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 22 9 hours ago, Wickham Green too said: Nah - that scrap iron was already on the boiler .... Freital Coßmannsdorf ; 30/4/91 Continental, so road signs would appear on the right of the driver. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 9 hours ago, PhilJ W said: They said the frames might be damaged or cracked and some wheels might need replacing. Indeed, they'd have to check just in case - but that'll be from the derailment rather than from whatever collision caused it to derail ......... and I can see nothing that would have caused it to veer to the left. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobby Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said: and I can see nothing that would have caused it to veer to the left. Surely that's just down to what angle the two vehicles came into contact, I could see it happening by the lorry getting caught up with the loco and the two being dragged round together which would explain how the rear of the lorry is alongside the loco. The combined weight would be enough to derail the loco and after that the trajectory makes sense. EDIT: There's a video here which confirms it and shows the accident, looks like the lorry ran the crossing judging by the speed it was going. https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/sachsen/dresden/dippoldiswalde-sebnitz/weisseritztalbahn-unfall-lkw-kran-gleis-100.html#:~:text=Der Polizei zufolge war am,und eine Laterne beschädigt worden. Edited August 22 by Hobby More information came to light! 3 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now