My neighbour bought his house because he believed that land consolidation would reopen a road.
His house is located in the forest and has only moderate transport links. He drives over 2 km of dirt road and then through a village, reaching a main road after a total of 6 km. He could reach the same road if he were allowed to use a 300 m (!) long path. This path crosses private property and was closed by a court years ago.
When the neighbour bought the property, he was told that he would be able to use this shortcut again once the land consolidation was complete. This would have made the house a bargain.
He bought it because he believed a few subordinates from the local authority.
In fact, land consolidation very rarely overturns or circumvents court rulings.
In the present case, there was no prospect of success, as the ruling had been upheld in the second instance. The road no longer exists – period!
If the neighbour had thought about it, he would have realised that repairing the dilapidated and closed road would incur considerable costs. It would have been very expensive for the municipality to make this path passable again. But, as already mentioned, land consolidation very rarely overturns existing court rulings.
So the neighbour was dealing with a lost cause. Now he's sitting in the middle of the forest waiting for aliens to land....
Kommentar