Thanks, I know a typo
So, have you actually sent a formal claim to the company that owns the vehicle - you said that you had communication from them admitting liability.
Thank you John, but I posted this unfortunate incident on here as I wanted to discuss and hear other views of ex pats, not just to get advice. Surely anyone who feels this is a waste of time can just not reply? or jog on as we say?
Jog on …means do not engage, pass by.
Your last post is somewhat disrespecful to the genuine efforts made in this topic initially.
We are not “ex pats” [sic]
Drip feeding critical information about an issue is not helpful and it is not for you to say who can, and cannot respond to any post on SF - members can make their own choices in that respect.
3 Likes
I think that it would be rather odd for the police to refer a matter to the Procureur without first having interviewed all available parties to the dispute.
Additionally, I would think that the Procureur is unlikely to make a decision without having considered the relevant evidence from all parties involved, as to do so would be likely to cause a waste of public funds in instigating a prosecution that could well be obviously bound to fail.
The Procureur is unbiased and will consider only matters of law and the available evidence.
I think it is also important to consider that the Procureur will not only consider whether or not @Suzan is at fault, but also whether or not the other party to this situation is at fault.
Therefore the referral to the Procureur, if indeed that has taken place, could well turn out to be to Suzan’s advantage in the long term.
3 Likes
Never the less Robert harsh as it may sound, ive been told procurer will make the decision literally in days and ive had no contact. Im also concerned that there is a mistake on one of cadastral plans, pointed out by an architect, so I have simply supplied the plan bought with house and another bought with hangar. The hangar cadastral shows my boundary moved up to house wall, which ive never been informed of or agreed to. However as I said a very very senior person is looking at it all so fingers crossed!
I also feel that this is the salient issue here. The collision and damage to the wall are a separate but potentially dependent issue.
I may be putting the pieces together wrongly but this does seem to bode too well.
If it were me I think I would be focusing on trying to get to the bottom of this apparent change in the boundary because it would niggle at me badly to feel I did not understand something as important as this. Given that there appears to be this unexplained factor that may potentially be very relevant, until I was satisfied that I understood it I would try to keep an open mind rather than hide this issue under the carpet. Then once I understood this, I would know where I stood. As Robert and others have said, it is all the interference of the he said, she said, “I’ve been told this and that and i’ve had no contact” so who has told you and how do they know?, that is causing doubt and worry. Suzan seems to be trying to make the issue (if there is one) go away but if the process has started it must be pursued through to a resolution. I am not sure what the benefit is of a very senior person looking at it, unless the expectation is that this senior person will take Suzan’s side and exert influence on the procureur
I hope this will not be the end of a beautiful friendship.
I simply mean that if you feel replying to the post is a waste of time the choice is your yours, I also think it highly disrespectful to say “you don’t have a clue what’s going on” when I have clearly outlined the predicament.
Mistakes happen on plans, including the cadastral plan held by the government. The only way to unambiguously determine the boundary is to have the land surveyed.
I’d generally assume that the bornes are in the right place - but even they can be off.
1 Like
Yes indeed, so if I had two plans of my land and they appeared different even to the naked eye - which suggests rather more than 35cm - I would want to find out the cause of the discrepancy. Regardless of whether or not any issues had arisen. I am not saying I would immediately engage a geomètre but I would start by querying it with the person who had prepared the second plan that differed from the original.
If indeed there are bornes. Often the piont of measurement might be a particular point on a building or even an electricity pole. These alternative bornes would be highlighted on the cadestral plan.
Could well be the case here.
The second plan could, of course, be the correct one 
No the second one can’t be, the plan in my title deeds submitted to Mairie many times for works the second one was a bornes but I don’t think they would change boundary without notification to myself.
I was replying to Sandcastle and meant in the general case.
My previous commune had every property re-cadastralised back in 2018/19 and it took the agents a very long time to get round every property. My particular property had an ancient stone well which was never marked on the previous cadastre so that had to be included as did some non-permanent sheds and a lean-too on back of the house that were literally just roofs and a couple of sides but no concrete bases so could be dismantled at any time but they were still included. Also in comparison between the two cadastral plans, there were slightly different measurements and the actual drawings of the two main buildings. I also had to get them back to re-do one boundary and also for them to put the correct address on the new plans plus after all those years of the same plot numbers for land and buildings, they changed all those too. So, things mayhave been changed recently and the OP had a different copy of the cadastre and as she dosn’t live there, might have had no idea it had been recently updated.
Seems like the second one is the one to trust as if borne postitions are shown it will have been prepared by a geometre. Your thinking that the second one can’t be is trumped by what seens to be its its legality.
The boundary has probably never changed, just your interpretation of it.
3 Likes
There’s a psychological bias to believing the first information we have on a given matter and assuming further information which is at odds with the first must be wrong.
It isn’t always the case.
Not really my interpretation, it’s a cadastral plan in my title deeds in black and white.
you may find this reference useful:
Nothing has changed since that article was written that I am aware of.
1 Like
The thing is that there is no definitive cadastral. If you have two plans which differ either one, or both could be in error. Not even the cadastral plans held by the French government have force of law.
The only way to resolve the issue is to carry out a new survey.
Edit: I see Graham sort-of beat me to the point.
1 Like