Taking legal action against property developer

da_rule

In one of the OP's posts there was also references to colours on a plan, so the date of that plan, as well as how it shows the land as looking would also provide a good indicator.

Vectis

Try looking at this from a slightly different perspective.

Where and how would you like deliveries to be made? Any particular times? I assume you agree that the shop has to receive supplies?

How often do they deliver? I know you say it takes 30 minutes to unload, but 30 minutes once a week wouldn't be too bad. Even 30 minutes a day would be ok, presumably, if it were at the most convenient time for you? Talk to the shop owner about the best delivery times for you to avoid problems.

Try working with the shop owner to come to an amicable solution.

gycraig_2

Vectis wrote: »

Try looking at this from a slightly different perspective.

Where and how would you like deliveries to be made? Any particular times? I assume you agree that the shop has to receive supplies?

How often do they deliver? I know you say it takes 30 minutes to unload, but 30 minutes once a week wouldn't be too bad. Even 30 minutes a day would be ok, presumably, if it were at the most convenient time for you? Talk to the shop owner about the best delivery times for you to avoid problems.

Try working with the shop owner to come to an amicable solution.

The shop was fine before the service road was built and would probably be fine if it never existed.

getmore4less

I would have a good look through the planning for any breaches.

From what was posed earlier if the access is OK then it comes down to enforcing contributions for maintenance consistent with the use/damage.

although that could risk them coming back with the road is substandard and needs upgrading to take the trucks.

moneyistooshorttomention

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Onus is on buyers to consider matters fully and initiate their own enquiries too. Not just sit back and expect others to cover ever single eventuality on their behalf.

Now I wouldnt agree with that personally.

There are any number of things that might turn out to be "wrong" with the plot the house is on etc etc and the average layperson in the street simply wouldn't be aware of the potential problems unless they (or a friend of theirs) had encountered this before.

People are going to assume they have a plot that is perfectly bog-standard ordinary in all respects if that's what they've always been used to and feel that they will be told (by vendor? by their solicitor? by their surveyor?) if things are different to that. After all - we pay for these professionals for a reason and that is part of it.

da_rule

moneyistooshorttoomention - I think what Thrugelmir was getting at was that it's the buyers job (including via their representatives and agents) to discover any problems. It is not the sellers responsibility to highlight them. If problems are discovered then it is the buyers choice whether they want to proceed and 'take the risk'.

da_rule

gycraig wrote: »

The shop was fine before the service road was built and would probably be fine if it never existed.

This is a bit of conjecture, I can't see anywhere where it has been said that there wasn't rear access to the shop before the development? The fact that there seems to be a way to access the shop from the rear (back doors etc) would suggest that rear access has been possible, unless these doors were added at a later date.

Also, the service road gives access to the bungalow, again there must have been some way of accessing this before the development.

And whilst it may have been fine if it never existed, it does exist, and from the appearance of it, the previous owners have retained a legal right over the land that has gone on to become the service road.

AdrianC

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Now I wouldnt agree with that personally.

There are any number of things that might turn out to be "wrong" with the plot the house is on etc etc and the average layperson in the street simply wouldn't be aware of the potential problems unless they (or a friend of theirs) had encountered this before.

People are going to assume they have a plot that is perfectly bog-standard ordinary in all respects if that's what they've always been used to and feel that they will be told (by vendor? by their solicitor? by their surveyor?) if things are different to that. After all - we pay for these professionals for a reason and that is part of it.

Yes, we do pay these professionals for a reason.

We pay the solicitor to determine if there are any problems with the legals.
We pay the surveyor to determine if there are any problems with the structure.

AFAICT, there don't appear to be any problems with either of those. So they've done their job.

The question is one of whether a neighbour is within their rights or not by using land, ancillary to the actual plot, in a specific way. Which professional is paid to determine that, before purchase?

The shop was already there before the OP purchased the property. Shops require deliveries. Deliveries come in trucks. If the presence of trucks was that big a problem for the OP, then I think that the ball was in their court to determine what information they required, and to get that information before purchase.

davidmcn

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

People are going to assume they have a plot that is perfectly bog-standard ordinary in all respects if that's what they've always been used to and feel that they will be told (by vendor? by their solicitor? by their surveyor?) if things are different to that. After all - we pay for these professionals for a reason and that is part of it.

"all properties adjoining the road have a right to use it, subject to contributing to maintenance costs" is pretty bog-standard, so I doubt anyone had a duty to point it out. It's the OP who expected something non-bog-standard ie that the shop wouldn't be entitled to use the road. Unless anyone said the contrary, I can't see that there are grounds for complaint about the advice given.

Yes the solicitor's report on title could have explained the full story about the whole estate, but I don't think it's negligent for them to concentrate on the rights and obligations of the property you're buying.

moneyistooshorttomention

It wouldn't have cost the solicitor more than 60 seconds of their time to verbally say to their client "You do realise there is the possibility that lorries delivering to that shop might use the road? This might bother you - in view of the fact you are having to pay towards maintaining the road (as these huge lorries do exert extra 'wear and tear' on road surfaces). Also they might be sitting there in the road for a while - as they unload".

Job done and it didn't take two shakes of a lambs tail to say that.