The row over a blocked twitten erupted again this week when council workers turned up to carry out an assessment.
There were scenes of fury, in Woodland Drive, Hove, and voices were raised as workers were confronted by the family at the centre of the controversy.
Worried about the escalating tempers, police were called for the third time in a fortnight, with two officers attending to keep the peace.
The two-hour confrontation ended without incident or arrests but is the latest in a long-running conflict.
The rumpus has been running since last October when a wall blew down in a storm and rubble and fencing fell across the well-used public footpath between two houses.
The owner of number 56 was set to carry out repair work but has since vacated the property – and bricks and fencing were left lying dangerously in the footpath.
Residents in neighbouring number 54 erected a 9ft wire fence, blocking the public right of way.
The family then claimed that the passageway between the two properties was not a public right of way at all and that they owned the land.
They have written to the council asserting their right to the land, claiming that they had previously granted “permissive access” to the footpath but were now withdrawing it.
Since then, a war of words has erupted with neighbours saying that they have used the twitten for decades to reach the shops and walk their dogs in the Three Cornered Copse.
On Tuesday (24 September) council workers visited the scene so they could assess repairs to the storm-damaged wall.
On arrival, they were confronted by Sohail Shahin, 30, the son of the homeowner, who disputed their right to access the footpath.
He said that Brighton and Hove City Council was aware that the family were exercising their right to withdraw permissive access to the pathway.
For their own protection, workers from council called the police to accompany them in their task.
Eventually they were able to persuade the homeowner to remove padlocks on the fencing and gained access to the twitten.
A team of council workers and contractors were able to assess the damage and the likely work needed to make it good.
But Nader Shahin, owner of the property, said: “The council know about our legal claim to this land. We have always granted permissive access to it but it’s not safe now.
“The row with our neighbours has been terrible. I have had people throwing dog mess into my house, people urinating against my walls and people spitting into my garden.
“It’s really very, very stressful. I can’t believe it has blown up into such a commotion but we are only doing what is right.”
Mr Shahin, a gas engineer, said: “I have lived here for the past 22 years and brought up my family here. I feel we are being unfairly vilified. But the council has to realise that we have a claim on the land.”
Sohail Shahin said: “This is going straight to a court of law. We’ll sue the council for this. They’re claiming it is a public right of way but they’re just trying to take what is rightfully ours.”
One council worker, who would not be named, said: “It’s outrageous that police have be called to ensure our safety. We shouldn’t have to face abuse and threats when we are just trying to do our work.
“This is a public right of way and needs to be opened up to the public as soon as possible.
“It has been used for decades by the public and suddenly this family claim they own it. It doesn’t add up.”
One resident, who would not be named, said: “This has been rumbling on for months and months and the family at the centre have made a right nuisance of themselves and are now at war with almost everyone.
“Enough is enough. If there are any further threats from this family towards neighbours then arrests have to be made.”
Councillor Trevor Muten, the council’s cabinet member for transport, parking and the public realm, said: “We have now made a legal order confirming our ownership of the land and our team has been back today to fully assess the damage to the wall so work can begin as soon as possible and the footpath can start being used again.
Sussex Police said: “We assisted the local authority in case of breach of peace. No arrests were made.”