Background

A few years ago we decided to sell off part of our property, half of it was split into two new properties. One of them was close to the access road, the other was right behind it. Consequently, to reach the property furthest from the road, the buyer would have to cross the property closest to the road. As that would be a bummer for the buyer of the closest property, we decided to install an easement on our property. This easement would allow the buyers of the furthest property to travel over our property to access their home.

When our property was split into three properties, the one we kept and the two new properties, we made arrangements for an easement to enable access to the new properties over our land. In Sweden where we live, this is administered by Lantmäteriet, the Land Office. They put together the legal paperwork that set up the property access for any potential buyer.

The easement text on our legal document:
…which translates to:
In practice, in Swedish property law an easement:

• allows the new owner to access our land to travel to and from their property
• allows for a road to be built on our land to allow for ease of access

The strip of land dedicated to this easement was located behind our garage and out of direct sight for us.

The sale

One of the two properties we planned to sell went online via our realtor. We decided to sell the furthest property first, and after that was sold, go out with the property closest to the road. Quite a few showed interest and contacted our realtor. A few made an offer on either one or both properties which we all rejected as they were too far off our expectations. Notably, quite a few were most interested in the property not for sale at the time. Some were even interested in buying both properties, and we finally sold both to a buyer, a couple looking for a larger plot of land.

At the time, we were quite happy to have found a buyer who bought both of our properties. It meant a swift deal without having to wait for another buyer for the unsold property. And in our view, only one new house suited the area better than two new houses.

Price-wise, we got almost what we asked for but we were happy with the deal we made. We had set a price in advance and were not prepared to negotiate a significant reduction of it. If it could not be sold for that price, we would simply hang on to it a little longer. The buyer’s offer only differed slightly from our asking price and the sale was made.

The buyers, now new owners, were a couple from Stockholm, slightly younger than we are, and their dog. We made our acquaintance during the selling process and seemed to get along nicely.

The build

The new owners built a road, did a lot of groundwork, and then built a house, their new home. They took their time, but that was ok, obviously one wants to build your new home right the first time.

The easement road

The new road serving the easement was planned and built by our new neighbors. They opted for a gravel road and kept it the agreed-upon distance away from our garage. This as not to upset the foundation of the building. They kept the distance and a fine easement road was built.

I have this for Swedes strange habit; when I see a neighbor working outside, say on a car, in the garden, or painting their house, I scoot over leisurely for some small talk. These are the only times I get to meet my neighbors so I try and keep in touch when I can and show my appreciation. I’ve done so all the years we have lived here, since 1997, and have admired everything from freshly mounted brake pads to newly installed kitchens. Of course, I did scoot over many times during the build of the new road and the new house to see what was going on and cheer on the builders and the new neighbors.

When their house was being built I happened to meet the neighbor when I was working outside. He said that they intended to put asphalt on the easement road for ease of maintenance. I responded that I did not like that very much as I did not fancy such a road on my property. Admittedly, I wasn’t sure if I had a say in the matter so I could not forbid him to do so. He responded that with the easement, they could do whatever they wanted with the road without me having a say in the matter. Quite sure that was complete nonsense, I wished him good luck and went on with my business.

Months later, I asked her how the asphalt was coming along. I mentioned having discussed it previously with her partner and had expressed my lack of enthusiasm. She responded that they did not feel asphalt would be suitable for a house in the countryside, which was my original point, and the road would remain as it was.

Later in the summer, when I was painting my garage, the neighbor came over and he pointed out to me that they had spoken with a lawyer who had said that they could do whatever they liked with the road, as the easement gave them all rights to do so. I hadn’t asked him about this and his statement was totally out of the blue and unsolicited. As an example, he claimed they could plant a forest of trees on the road if they liked that. Aware of how an easement works, I pointed out that his view on an easement was incorrect, and he was not allowed to plant a forest there – it was still our land. He responded, again unsolicited, that they had this explained to them by a lawyer and they did have that right. Again, I wished him good luck and went on with my painting.

The hedge

Last few weeks of November 2024, the neighbors had been busy with their property. A few workers running a small digger and some sort of tractor had been preparing what I assumed to be the foundation of a shed. I hadn’t spoken to them about it though as I hadn’t been out much that week.

When I went out on Tuesday to see what was going on, I found the lady busy planting half-meter-tall hedge plants between the easement road behind the garage and our property. She had help planting the hedge from another lady I had not met before. She explained the hedge was meant as a divider between our properties. But they had placed the property divider 4 meters into our property which made no sense as their property ended as the official property border, not 4 meters away from it.

I stated clearly that I did not agree to a hedge on our property and told them to stop planting the rest of it. By then, they had only done between five and ten meters of it. They did not comply. Instead, she made it clear to me that the easement meant they owned the land and had the right to do whatever they wanted with it – including planting a hedge. I told her that’s not how an easement works. So I promised I’d investigate and be back later that day.  I went inside to check with the Land Office.

The 1st line support at the Land Office agreed that the easement only allowed access and did not cater for the planting of a hedge. But for legal reasons, they did not want to provide me with this statement in writing. Instead, I got 2nd line support: the legal department. I explained what the neighbors were up to and got in reply that they indeed did not own the right and the only right provided to them by the easement was travel to and from their home – nothing more. She emailed me the legal text of the easement and a map showing the properties involved in the easement.

With the fresh information from the Land Office, I went out again to inform the neighbors they had to stop working on the hedge and told them what I had learned from the Land Office. They were not impressed and continued. I had expected her to stop hedging and call either the Land Office or her ‘lawyer’ for confirmation of their claim and then knock on our door to negotiate. She did neither.

By this time the hedge had advanced so far it would hinder me from driving to our property via their access road. We do have our own access road but found it sometimes convenient to access our property via the easement road. This can be with a trailer or when we have visitors with a campervan. Even though that road was built and paid for by the neighbors, it is clearly on our land and we do have the right to use it. I mentioned this to her and told her to stop. She only repeated her claim that they owned the land and did not have to give me access to it. If I wanted a road, I’d have to build a new one parallel to ‘their road’ and use that instead. Of course, I objected again to this and promised to get back.

I tried to contact our real estate dealer to hear his view on the matter but first got hold of him in the evening.

As the hedge was finished that day and did indeed effectively block me from driving our cars through there, we awaited our real estate agent and considered what to do next.

We did not call the police on the neighbors, something that we perhaps should have done as it would have stopped further planting of the hedge.

Our realtor called us in the evening and at first thought I was joking when I explained to him the situation with the neighbors. It was obvious to him that they were completely out of order with their assumptions of ownership and the hedge. In his view:

• they do not own the road
• the road can only be used for access to and from their property
• they cannot plant a hedge four meters in on our property
• they cannot deny us having access and using the road

This made perfect sense to us as we had interpreted the law on easements to work that way, and the Land Office had informally confirmed this.

Letters

We decided to start by formally informing the neighbors to remove the hedge and restore the road to its original condition so we could access it again. We emailed both of them on Sunday and set the deadline for next Friday. They responded already on Wednesday. Even if their answer did not mention they owned the road, they were adamant about their right to have the hedge there and were under no obligation to provide us with access to their road. Notably, their view was based on that we had been paid ‘extremely well’ when we sold the property.

I recall several other properties being on the market at that time, and we were in line with the current pricing level for similar properties.

With no movement in the way they viewed the issue, it was time for us to lawyer up…

The lawyer

As I prefer to buy locally, I browsed the list of local lawyers. One of them seemed to have property rights as a specialty, so that was an easy choice. I called the office, was connected to one of their lawyers, and briefly explained the situation. He assured us that the neighbors had no right to plant the hedge where they had, nor did they have the right to deny us access to the road on our land. We discussed what now was ‘the case ‘ and its implications; what would be next and what would it all cost.

We agreed that it would be a good idea to start showing the neighbors we had lawyered up and meant business with our claim. The lawyer asked me to write down and email him the facts. Based on this, he would start writing a letter that his office would send to the neighbors by registered mail. My wife and I summarized the sequence of events and emailed them to the lawyer. From now on, things were out of our hands. The lawyer wrote the letter, we approved it and it was sent to the legal addresses of the neighbors. Oddly enough, the lawyer found out that both had different addresses elsewhere. Again, they had a week to respond before we would take action.

According to the lawyer, escalation meant outsourcing the requirement to a debt collection agency, That agency would again inform the neighbors, but this time with the threat that a company would be hired to remove the hedge and restore the road if they did not comply.

They did reply to the letter but it took more than a week. I assume we can thank the speed of the Swedish mail for that.  Their answer was the same again: the hedge would stay. Notably, they did write the reply themselves – the aforementioned lawyer was not yet involved.

The fact that the neighbors had replied – albeit late –  meant we would not have to escalate to Kronofogden, the debt collection agency, but could directly do the ‘see you in court‘ thing. That’ll be a first for us, can’t wait…

We discussed the letter and the next step with our lawyer and decided to wait a few weeks. After all, it was the holiday season and we were in no particular hurry. Our lawyer would have a short holiday and be back in the office around the 3rd week of January,  He would then get back to us with what to do next.

Next step

By the end of January, we had decided to go on with the case. Our lawyer was back from his holidays and agreed a courtcase wold be a logical next step. He would prepare a courtcase, a copy of it would be sent to the neighbors before filing the case at Tingsrätten, the Swedish court that handles this kind of cases.

We were not thrilled by the idea of informing the neighbors once again of our plans. They had been informed in the previous letter that we ‘would take steps’. Why inform them again? According to the lawyer, Swedish courts do not look kindly on avoiding steps to avoid court cases. Not informing them now might very well be seen by the court as not attempting to accomplish a peaceful solution first. That might very well lead the court to not charging the court and legal costs on the neighbors. But, once the case is filed by the court, it will be persued.

The initial letter has been sent and led to a surprising reaction: The neighbors were spotted walking around with a small stepladder and taking pictures. Not only did they take pictures of their road but even of our road. I have no doubt there’s a solid legal strategy somewhere behind these photos.

The real case will be filed in court in a week, and that will trigger the court to set things in motion:

• validating the correctness of our claim
• informing all parties that the case is now in the system
• planning to handle the case

All of which – with the exception of the final point – should be processed in a swift manner. According to the lawyer, these courts are slightly pressed for time, and it may be a year from now before we see the inside of a courtroom. On the other hand, simple cases may be prioritized by the court, which just might kick our case right to the top of their list. The future will tell…

A response to the sent letter arrived swiftly – which is always good. Unfortunately, it kept quite a aggressive tone and made a lot of statements, some true, some bent, others untrue. Not only we but also the law office are said to be ignorant and not aware of the law. Here are some examples:

• I trespassed on their land!
  >> Indeed, I remember one time I took the long way home last summer, crossing ‘their’ road in the process. But, since it is our land, not the neighbors, I can hardly be trespassing. Not guilty your honor!
• According to the letter, we refused a proposal by the Land Office for a more suitable path of easement, picture included.
  >> I do remember that preliminary picture, it was long before we got the easement sorted and we, with the realtor, made a sketch of how we could provide easy access. As this solution implied the neighbors would be crossing in front of our house, we decided against it and went for the easement as it later was sold with. So no proposal was received or even refused. Unclear if that picture is available at the Land Office or that it was derived from other sources.
• We are warned that trials are expensive and we’d better know what we’re doing before engaging in such ordeals.
  >> Yes, trials probably are expensive, as are lawyers. Haven’t tried court yet, but the lawyer has cost us a pretty penny so far, and more to come. The neighbor runs a cheap deal and does all his lawyering himself. The lawyer mentioned by them earlier has not yet been put on a retainer.
• Some remarks are directed at our lawyer who wrote the brief, and points out things he’s done wrong. The incorrect sequence of things, his lack of knowledge on the subject, and some more.
  >> Well, I’ll stick to my lawyer! You stick to yours.
• He mentions ‘veiled threats’ made in the lawyer’s brief.
  >> Yes, that’s what letters from lawyers intend to do. They tell you to do things, or else. The else in this case is the see you in court threat.
• A serious point is made about the difference between the two existing types of easements out here in Sweden; an official easement and a contract easement. In their view, we’re not addressing this errand very well for the type of easement in place. The ‘…not…very well…’ should be read as ‘really bad’!
  >> We have the former type of easement, which as I’ve stated above provides the right to access their property – nothing more, nothing less. They accuse us and our lawyer of not knowing what either means in detail.
• It is pointed out that I have sort of a reputation in the area for lack of respect for the neighbors property borders. The example shows that I’ve told kids in the neighborhood not to play on my property.
  >> Indeed I have! On two occasions in fact:
  • One time probably 5 years ago, the kids of our nearest neighbor were playing in the forest on our property, breaking down branches of trees and unrooting bushes in the process. In their defense, they were building a hut. In my defense, they were breaking things on my property.
  • Another time was when one of the 7 year olds got a mini-cross bike from his dad. The idea was for him to practice on our property. Obviously, I declined that ‘offer’.
  • Still not guilty your honor!
• A statement is made that our realtor, let’s call them ‘company A’, sold the real estate for us.
  >> This is however, again untrue. We never had any dealings with company A and never had the chance to use their no doubt stellar services.
• The neighbor proclaims that a third of the sales price would be compensation for the easement area, for about 40m2 according to them. So it would be a third for each of the plots, and an extra third for the easement. Again this would have been explained by the realtor, company A that was no part of the deal whatsoever.
  >> I can and will check with our real realtor, but am convinced that even these remarks are the result of a healthy fantasy. When setting the price, we had a figure in mind. This did not seem out of order for the realtor so we went with that. As already said before, there were other plots for sale in the area, and our price was not excessive. Yes, we wanted to get paid for them, who would not? But certainly a too hight price would render the plots unsellable, where they in fact they sold rather quickly. Not buying this one either!
  The price we set was a fixed price for plot 1 and the same price for plot 2. No extra prices or compensations were set for the easement.
• …sorry, had to run. The camera complained about movement outside: the neighbor taking new pictures again.
• …did I mention we’re only on page 2 of 5?
• Supported by no less than 3 several photos, a point is made that there never was a road where the easement road was built. This is then used as an argument to refuse us access to ‘their’ easement road.
  >> Obviously we were aware that there was no road before! But how that should be an argument to no longer allow us on our property remains very unclear.
• It is explained in great effort that we have tried to force our way upon the easement road, this is referred to as theirs. And that without asking to agree upon an agreement first.
  >> Yeah, negotiate a contract to enter my property, that’ll be the day!
• Again, it is pointed out, now by a photo, that we did not agree to the easement as proposed by the land Office.
  >> Again, there never was an agreement from the Land Office. Nor did we ever have the opportunity to deny such a non-existing proposal.
• Then there’s a photo of the side of the garage and our house. With this, it is argued that we do not need access to that part of our property as it is a mess.
  >> In my defense, yes, it is a bit of a mess there. The reason being for it to be there is that it is the kind of stuff you store behind the garage. It was moved out of the way to make room for the road to be built.
  And yes, we previously had a caravan that lived on that small plot for several years. And before that we had a twin axle trailer that was parked there. In any of these cases the now easement road would have been the means of access. So yes, I’d like to have access thank you very much.
• The 5-page brief ends with a lovely photo of our own access road with our house on the background – I get sentimental every time I see such a lively sight. It is used to point out that we have had our own access road for 27 years right there.
  >> Formally it is 28 years, but who’s counting? It is also totally irrelevant to the case; we want access to our land!
  Fun fact: I noticed the neighbors running around with a small stepladder and managed to take his picture just as he was taking the picture of our home I mentioned above! I’ll be putting in some photos later, to help you understand this serious legal battle even better.

Note that all points above are either unrelated to the issue at hand, or falsifications to begin with. Not many of these points, if any, will make it to the next step. I did want to clear up the issue with the kids that I scared away, and the erroneous statements on the Land Office and the realtor. As the neighbor mentions he will forward all our correspondence to the court as evidence, and that evidence will include the info on the scared-away kids. Something that perhaps the parent of those kids mentioning this to our neighbor (in confidence?) might regret.

Beyond the final call

Our lawyer found no contributing facts in the response from the neighbors. The content was either more jibberish on previous jibberish or total nonsense. In his professional opinion, it was a total and complete misunderstanding of how to interpret the simple rights of an easement. Had they hired legal help from the beginning, this case would have been ended months ago with removal of the hedge.

Anyway, as there’s no deviation from their previous opinion in the case, there’s no point in continuing sending cease and desist letters. Now we go to court.

The work for filing the case in court has largely already been done, so it is a matter of a final review and then send it off. Once received by the court, the court will apply a number of checks and then send invitations to all participants. Likely, the court will ask for extra information that they feel might contribute in their understanding of the case. When all of these preparations are completed, the court will propose a court date. Not that all of this can take everything between two months and a year. It seems to be the habit for the court to prioritize what they persieve as simple errands. This in an effort to get these done and over with. Hopefully, this will be the case for us.

The court in this case will be Tingsrätten (Districk court). There will be one judge, a court clerk, no jurors, but perhaps a trainee judge. Our lawyer estimated that the court would spend six hours on the case. The procedure will be:

• hearing our case
• hearing the neighbors case
• asking questions
• go over the evidense
• hear witnesses (if any)
• asking more questions
• final plea for both parties
• end of the court day
• the court’s decision will follow days or maybe even weeks later

The insurance company has asked our lawyer to come up with an estimate what removal of the hedge and rebuild of the road would cost. We cannot really provide an answer as removal of the hedge would be seen by the court as illegal and stronlgy negatively impact our case.

From here on, it’ll be a waiting game… Keep ya posted.

Frivolous remarks

Obviously, we discussed the issue above with our kids, friends, and family. Here are some findings:

• We have yet to find someone who agrees with the claims made by the neighbors.
• Two persons, both non-Swedes like us, wondered if the neighbors perhaps assumed that a bunch of foreigners wouldn’t know the law.
• A well-known, now infamous, Swedish politician, and former governor of Stockholm, Anna Kindberg Batra once said:
  ‘Stockholmare är smartare än lantisar‘
  …meaning:
  ‘Stockholmers are smarter than country people‘. Country people is meant here as hillbillies.
  And yes, she did indeed mean it that way! Notably, the politician was recently accused of breaking several laws, including the Swedish constitution, in her official capacity as governor. After this was brought into the open by journalists, she was forced to vacate her position as governor of Stockholm.
  Did I mention our neighbors are from Stockholm? Perhaps the neighbors took this statement to heart…
• Can I access the easement road, you may wonder?
  Of course I can, but I won’t. The reason for this is to avoid more tension being built and avoid more confrontations with the neighbors alleging me to be tresspassing. But, the day we have a verdict, I’ll make a point of using the easement road on a daily basis from that day onwards.

Next time…

For future reference and with the benefit of hindsight: Next time around, at the earliest convenience take the biggest car you can lay your hands on, carefully position the wheels on one side of it in the path of the hedge, and drive the vehicle over the hedge, flatting it in the process. Steer the vehicle back and forth a couple of times for good measure. Then wait for the neighbors to call the police and let them explain to them that the hedge was illegal in the first place.

That said, I never met neighbors this ignorant and probably never will again…