Neighbours’ ‘ridiculous’ row over a garden tap racks up £250,000 in legal bills

A row between neighbours over a garden tap has been blasted as ‘ridiculous’ by a senior judge after racking up £250,000 in legal bills.

The bitter court fight over a strip between two houses in Ilford, east London, barely wide enough for a person to walk down has raged for seven years.

It began when pensioner Christel Naish, 81, complained that her doctor neighbour Jyotibala Patel’s garden tap and pipe were ‘trespassing’ on her property.

The disagreement escalated into a costly boundary dispute and a judge at Mayors and Cirt County Court last year ruled in Dr Patel’s favour.

It left Ms Naish with more than £200,000 in lawyers’ bills for the case.

But she is now fighting on at the High Court, despite being told that the case could end up costing about £500,000 if she wins – more than Dr Patel paid for her house.

Following the trial, the pensioner had been left having to fork out for 65% of her neighbours’ costs, amounting to around £100,000, on top of the six-figure sum she ran up herself. 

However, the appeal is costing more than £30,000, the High Court heard, and her lawyers say it could result in ‘another £200,000’ being blown on a second trial if she succeeds.

Senior judge Sir Anthony Mann said of the case this week: ‘Hundreds of thousands of pounds about a tap and a pipe that doesn’t matter – this brings litigation into disrepute.

‘You don’t care about the pipe and the tap, so why does it matter, for goodness’ sake, where the boundary lies?

‘It seems to me to be a ridiculous piece of litigation – on both sides, no doubt.’

Dr Patel and her husband Vasos Vassili bought the house next door to Ms Naish for £450,000 in 2013.

The couple’s barrister, Paul Wilmshurst, told the judge that the dispute began due to Ms Naish repeatedly complaining that a tap and pipe outside their house trespassed on her land.

At the county court, they claimed the tiny gap between the houses – created when the previous owners of their home built an extension on a previously much wider gap in 1983 – was theirs.

Judge Stephen Hellman last year found for Dr Patel and Mr Vassili, ruling that Ms Naish’s flank wall was the boundary and meaning they own the gap between the houses.

Concluding his judgment, he said: ‘Now that the parties have the benefit of a judgment on the various issues that have been troubling them, I hope that tensions will subside and that they will be able to live together as good neighbours.’

But Ms Naish has continued to fight and took her case to the High Court for an appeal last week.

It prompted judge Sir Anthony Mann to ask her barrister David Mayall: ‘What is the point of this litigation?’

Mr Mayall replied: ‘It’s because for many years the appellant has been making allegations about the trespassing nature of the [tap and pipe], thereby making it impossible for them to sell their house.’

After a day in court, Sir Anthony reserved judgment on the appeal.

Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.

For more stories like this, check our news page.