Taking legal action against property developer

bouicca21

What do the deeds of the shop/house say about use of the ROW?

da_rule

OP, this is beginning to get confusing, you quoted a bit from a deed which stated (summarised), that the access road could be used for purposes related to the property, was this from the shop or the bungalow?

Gorideb4

I'm nit st home right now so will respond when back at home with the documents. From recollection in legal terms the bungalow and shop are one entity. They are part of one building.

getmore4less

If you guys(5 houses) own the road, seek maintenance contributions at 100% of the damage caused by the retained land users that are exercising their access rights.

for the benefit of the retained land and every part thereof subje t to the tranferor paying one sixth or such other fair proportion according to user of the cost of the maintenance and upkeep of that part of the Estate road as may be reasonably required by the Transferee

I still think complaints to the delivery companies head offices that they are causing damage to the road and the their drivers are not using the appropriate delivery bay may get some positive action

moneyistooshorttomention

getmore4less wrote: »

If you guys(5 houses) own the road, seek maintenance contributions at 100% of the damage caused by the retained land users that are exercising their access rights.



I still think complaints to the delivery companies head offices that they are causing damage to the road and the their drivers are not using the appropriate delivery bay may get some positive action

Those words "such other fair proportion" I guess? That doesnt sound unreasonable to me that "fair" in this context = pay up extra because of the extra damage you (ie the shop) causes.

....and...yep....I'd agree with getting onto the head offices of the delivery companies about their drivers. What have you got to lose by trying after all?

AdrianC

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Those words "such other fair proportion" I guess? That doesnt sound unreasonable to me that "fair" in this context = pay up extra because of the extra damage you (ie the shop) causes.

Is there any damage? Really? Must be a VERY badly built and underspecified road, then.

Remember that bin wagon that turns up every week? What's that weigh? Or a fire engine full of water? Surely the road is specified for them...? Is there any signage giving a maximum weight?

Most of the OP's original complaint was around obstruction and danger to children, remember. Damage was mentioned briefly in passing, and not actually quantified.

dlmcr

Not read all of the posts here but I owned a house that was in sort of a similar situation - the main similarities: access by private road / drive, nobody really wanted to take responsibility for the upkeep of area, area was used by vehicles that shouldn't be using it for things they shouldn't be doing. Outcome: I sold up.
From my experience owning that property my advice is to sell up asap, don't take legal action, don't take the issue any further, and take the lesson that in future never ever buy a house that doesn't front directly onto a council owned road.
You will find that if you start sending letters to lorry companies etc this will not achieve anything and if you start then going legal there will be quickly be a large and rapidly rising bill. It is not worth it. Cut your losses or if you are lucky, gains, and sell.

davidmcn

Cakeguts wrote: »

That doesn't mean that they have right of way for deliveries to the shop it only means that they have a right of way to their residence. The fact that the shop is attached doesn't mean that the shop has a right of way. Only the residence of the shop owner.

Gorideb4 wrote: »

The road is owned equally by the five houses. The shop doesn't own it but has right of way as their residence is located in our street. This is attached to the shop.

No, the shop has a right of way because they reserved a right of way in the deed in which they sold the land for residential development:

There are reserved out of the property for the benefit of the whole and every part of the retained land...a right of way over and along the estate road at all times and for all purposes for the benefit of the retained land

Cakeguts

davidmcn wrote: »

No, the shop has a right of way because they reserved a right of way in the deed in which they sold the land for residential development:

From what it says at the top of this thread it looks as if the shop owner has a right of way to the bungalow. It doesn't look as if the shop has right of way.

davidmcn

Cakeguts wrote: »

From what it says at the top of this thread it looks as if the shop owner has a right of way to the bungalow. It doesn't look as if the shop has right of way.

That was the OP's initial misunderstanding of the situation - see posts #35 and #37.