Absence of easement-HELP!

moneyistooshorttomention

I doubt any claim for a prescriptive easement would work - as it would probably be the case that "all or none" of the house-owners would have to state they had and it would be easy for anyone who disagreed with treating grass as a road to state those car-owners hadn't been in counterclaim.

That could be quite a court battle to be allowed to do what isn't allowed anyway.

Misspoppins

Thanks for info.
Yes I have access via foot rights.

silvercar

Misspoppins wrote: »

Thanks for info.
Yes I have access via foot rights.

So your buyers need to accept that:

a) there is access by foot and they could park on the road or somewhere else nearby
b) that for years everyone has driven rough shod over the green and the council not objected
c) that there is an indemnity policy that may have been invalidated by the request for a dropped kerb and easement.

I would leave it like that and tell them there is little more you can do and they need to make up their own mind whether to proceed.

Did your solicitor spot your application for easement, or did you mention it?

G_M

So you own a house with no road access, only pedestrian access. You bought it on that basis, and presumably it was priced on that basis.

You have attempted to gain road access which would a) make it more attractive a home (to some) and b) increase its value. This is pending.

So wait. If the council agree, build the dropped curb (and continue to damage the green by driving over it) and rub your hands with glee at the jump in your property's value.

If the council refuse, you are back where you started - no better off no worse off....

As for this particular buyer, either he accepts this position and buys (at whatever price he is willing to pay which you are willig to accept), or not.

moneyistooshorttomention

G_M wrote: »

So you own a house with no road access, only pedestrian access. You bought it on that basis, and presumably it was priced on that basis.



.

That is the crux of the matter.

Now the Council have been alerted to this driving over the green (ie by the application for a dropped kerb) then I would say trying to sell for any more than equivalent price to what was paid (ie that no access price) is a dead duck.

I'm guessing that the OP honestly did believe that there is now an "unwritten rule" that its okay for people in those houses to drive over a public green. Perhaps she might like a few firm words with any neighbour that wrongly convinced her of this?

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I doubt any claim for a prescriptive easement would work - as it would probably be the case that "all or none" of the house-owners would have to state they had and it would be easy for anyone who disagreed with treating grass as a road to state those car-owners hadn't been in counterclaim.

That could be quite a court battle to be allowed to do what isn't allowed anyway.

It's nothing to do with anyone else. Only individuals with the necessary right to claim, and proof that they had that right, could.

When I created a prescriptive easement on foot at my old place, I'd had the foresight 20 years before to involve my solicitor from the day I completed on the property. There are other ways to prove use over time, of course.

The fact that I eventually had that easement didn't give Joe Bloggs 3 doors down the same right. It was nothing to do with him. I gave my immediate neighbour use of the same footway because we were friends and it helped to have someone else involved. He's still enjoying the use of it; knocks 5 minutes off the walk to town.

And knocking down someone else's fence and installing one's own gate in its place 'isn't allowed,' but I still did it.

What a bad person I am! :rotfl:

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I'm guessing that the OP honestly did believe that there is now an "unwritten rule" that its okay for people in those houses to drive over a public green. Perhaps she might like a few firm words with any neighbour that wrongly convinced her of this?

Why guess?

OP has stated quite clearly that all the people in the houses and some of the people in the bungalows around the green drive over the grass to access their properties.

Therefore, I doubt if anyone needed to convince her that it was OK, because clearly it has been allowed to happen for some time, without the council stepping-in and preventing it.

I think some of you here are being over-harsh, as the OP was at least trying to formalise the situation, though it is not clear whether she did this in connection with the sale process or at some earlier time.

moneyistooshorttomention

I don't personally think its harsh to state that a public green is a public green and that means feet are the only means of getting across it.

silvercar

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I don't personally think its harsh to state that a public green is a public green and that means feet are the only means of getting across it.

Not if everyone in the vicinity has been allowed to drive over it for decades. You are describing something akin to a village green, but it may be no more than a wide grass verge.

Misspoppins

silvercar wrote: »

So your buyers need to accept that:

a) there is access by foot and they could park on the road or somewhere else nearby
b) that for years everyone has driven rough shod over the green and the council not objected
c) that there is an indemnity policy that may have been invalidated by the request for a dropped kerb and easement.

I would leave it like that and tell them there is little more you can do and they need to make up their own mind whether to proceed.

Did your solicitor spot your application for easement, or did you mention it?

I mentioned it. I didn't know I had done anything wrong, legal minefield!