Problems with access to building plot

G_M

karenb33 wrote: »

It just seems such nonsense - if there is just one home on the land there will be no increase in the use of either of the accesses - and who is going to monitor it? If the owner just steps onto A after accessing from B - who knows?? It's a strange legal position.

There is a difference between

* what legal rights a person has & what is 'fair'
* what can be actually monitored & what may never be known/seen
* whether traffic is allowed to increase, & whether it does increase

If I drive at 31 mph in a 30 zone,

* no one will know;
* almost certainly it will make no difference to the liklihood of my having an accident ((yeah - I know the debate, but I'm looking for an analogy here!).
* it would be almost impossible to prove (I don't believe police cameras are that sensitive....?)

But it is still illegal.

Chances are if you personally use South Lane to access field B once in a while, noone will know, complain, or enforce their rights.

But they could. And if they had, say, a grudge due to some other neighbour dispute, and started filming you accesing the other field, then things could escalate.

davidmcn

The more likely practical problem is that a future solicitor for a buyer or lender is likely to notice the issue - and you can't insure your way out of it when the neighbour is already aware.

Tom99

AdrianC wrote: »

But he would be using the South Lane RoW to access field A. He is not accessing field B via South Lane - there is no such physical access...

He is then accessing field B via field A. The owner of South Lane can't do anything to stop that, any more than he can stop any other legal use of field A or field B, or the legal use of the RoW from North Lane to access field B.

Yes I believe that is the correct interpretation. Even if he built a house on field B with a driveway over field A he would still be ok accessing what was part of field A from South Lane, as long as he continued to own the driveway.

Mardle

karenb33 wrote: »

It just seems such nonsense - if there is just one home on the land there will be no increase in the use of either of the accesses - and who is going to monitor it? If the owner just steps onto A after accessing from B - who knows?? It's a strange legal position.

If you're only building one home on the land would you need both accesses?

AdrianC

Mardle wrote: »

If you're only building one home on the land would you need both accesses?

Having two accesses can be useful, especially if the two access different directions. You're going north, head out on North Lane. You're going south, head out on South Lane.

We have two vehicular accesses - we tend to use one as foot-only, because it's accessed over grass (on our land - tarmac the other side). However, when it's handy, it's very handy, not least because it means the LPG delivery truck can get right to our tank. If we didn't have that gate, we'd have to relocate the tank completely.