From: jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu 
  
 On 2025-08-01, Kempshott  wrote: 
 > On 01/08/2025 15:54, Roger Hayter wrote: 
 >> On 1 Aug 2025 at 15:27:26 BST, "Jon Ribbens"  
 >> wrote: 
 >> 
 >>> On 2025-08-01, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote: 
 >>>> On 31/07/2025 18:34, Roland Perry wrote: 
 >>>>> In message , at 13:36:35 on Thu, 31 
 >>>>> Jul 2025, Kempshott  remarked: 
 >>>>>> Does a Local Authority have a statutory duty to keep its online 
 >>>>>> definitive map up to date? 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>>> Ours still says "last update March 2021" and there have been many 
 >>>>>> Modification Orders passed since then. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> I bet there's a lot of pre-2021 changes not on it either. I've had 
 cause 
 >>>>> to look at these maps in the past, and they are often woefully out of 
 date. 
 >>>> 
 >>>> It is pot luck what is and what is not included on the definitive maps. 
 >>>> 
 >>>> I suspect form the name that they are supposed to be maintained but if 
 >>>> you know an area well it isn't hard to find recent changes that are 
 >>>> missing. Updating them doesn't seem to be a high priority. 
 >>> 
 >>> There's either two possibilities, and I think the answer could be either 
 >>> depending on which local authority it is. 
 >>> 
 >>> Either it isn't "the Definitive Map" at all, it's just an online map, 
 >>> in which case I would expect there's no statutory duty to update it. 
 >>> It might claim to reflect information from the Definitive Map, but 
 >>> that doesn't make it definitive itself. 
 >>> 
 >>> Or, it is "the Definitive Map", in which case it is, er, definitive. 
 >>> If it shows a right of way exists, then it does, and if it doesn't, 
 >>> it doesn't. If they haven't updated it to show rights of way that 
 >>> the council intended to create, then they haven't created them. 
 >> 
 >> I agree that this is the apparent legal situation. But it may be that 
 >> a third possibility exists: that the 'definitive map' actually exists 
 >> in a state which entails an old map and a set of approved amendments 
 >> to it which together constitutes the 'definitive map'. It is not 
 >> impossible that a court would accept this as the least worst 
 >> interpretation. 
 > 
 > The council website says "The publication of a new Definitive Map has 
 > been a priority for the Council, and this was achieved when the first 
 > digital version of the Map was published on the 12 March 2021". 
 > 
 > That's followed by a link to maps.arcgis.com and the map is titled 
 > "Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way" so it seems to be "the" 
 > definitive map, just rather out-of-date. 
  
 That would seem to be rather unfortunate and to leave the legal 
 situation with regards to rights of way in a somewhat ambiguous 
 situation. The whole point of the definitive map is to have one 
 source of truth that anyone can easily inspect. If it's not 
 actually true then that kind've negates the whole concept. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)