House with unadopted road, no management company

gettingtheresometime

If the road was being put up for adoption, then wouldn't the developer would have had to provide a bond when applying for the S38 just in case they went bust and the council had the job of stepping in?

RelievedSheff

gettingtheresometime wrote: »

If the road was being put up for adoption, then wouldn't the developer would have had to provide a bond when applying for the S38 just in case they went bust and the council had the job of stepping in?

Yes they would which is why a call to the local highways authority, which isn't always the same as the local council, would be beneficial in this instance.

Kis1981

gettingtheresometime wrote: »

If the road was being put up for adoption, then wouldn't the developer would have had to provide a bond when applying for the S38 just in case they went bust and the council had the job of stepping in?

In my case, the developer didn't provide a bond and the council prosecuted the developer. The developer then went bust. Is it the council's responsibility to make sure there was a bond in place?

trickydicky802

First, check the property deeds to find out if they specifiy any legal obligation to maintain the road, e.g. each property to pay 1/10th of the maintenance costs, or something like that. If so then this will help with any discussions with neighbours when it comes to repairs. If there's no legal obligation to maintain the road then it doesn't mean you won't have to pay when the time comes but it could mean problems in getting every property to contribute.

Second, when the roadway does require repairs it's likely to be quite a few thousand pounds and the neighbours may have varying levels of 'enthusiasm' in paying £500-£1000 or more in one hit. Also, some neighbours may have lived there for a long time, others may have just moved in, so a 'lump sum' approach is not really fair to all.

I'd suggest talking to the neighbours with a view to setting up 'residents association' for the sole purpose of maintaining the roads. Elect a chairman and treasurer (maybe a secretary if you wish), discuss and agree a monthly contribution from each property, open a 'community bank account' with two signatories and get every property to set up a standing order into the account. Don't use a standard bank account because they'll charge a fee. Coop bank offers a free 'community' bank account. They'll want to see a 'constitution' for the association but that's quite easy to write. Keep a register of members and hold an AGM every year - this can be a coffee morning to discuss any issues, publish a financial statement (basically a copy of the bank statement) and agree any maintenance (if any) needed in the coming year.

I'm suggesting all this from experience of owing a 1/3rd mile unadopted tarmac'd lane over which a number of other properties have right of way for access. Their deeds all specify that they must contribute x% of the maintenance costs of the lane but because of different histories 'x' is not equally split across all properties - obviously not fair, but legally quite clear. Fortunately, all the neighbours are sensible, helpful people and we quickly agreed on a 'residents association' as outlined above. It has been working well for many years now, the lane remains in good condition, payments are a comfortable £10/month per property (regardless of what their deeds specify) and we are close to being able to reduce that as the maintenance fund has built up to a healthy amount.

There may be other ways of managing such things but this one is working for us.

MoneySeeker1

trickydicky802 wrote: »

First, check the property deeds to find out if they specifiy any legal obligation to maintain the road, e.g. each property to pay 1/10th of the maintenance costs, or something like that. If so then this will help with any discussions with neighbours when it comes to repairs. If there's no legal obligation to maintain the road then it doesn't mean you won't have to pay when the time comes but it could mean problems in getting every property to contribute.

Second, when the roadway does require repairs it's likely to be quite a few thousand pounds and the neighbours may have varying levels of 'enthusiasm' in paying £500-£1000 or more in one hit. Also, some neighbours may have lived there for a long time, others may have just moved in, so a 'lump sum' approach is not really fair to all.

I'd suggest talking to the neighbours with a view to setting up 'residents association' for the sole purpose of maintaining the roads. Elect a chairman and treasurer (maybe a secretary if you wish), discuss and agree a monthly contribution from each property, open a 'community bank account' with two signatories and get every property to set up a standing order into the account. Don't use a standard bank account because they'll charge a fee. Coop bank offers a free 'community' bank account. They'll want to see a 'constitution' for the association but that's quite easy to write. Keep a register of members and hold an AGM every year - this can be a coffee morning to discuss any issues, publish a financial statement (basically a copy of the bank statement) and agree any maintenance (if any) needed in the coming year.

I'm suggesting all this from experience of owing a 1/3rd mile unadopted tarmac'd lane over which a number of other properties have right of way for access. Their deeds all specify that they must contribute x% of the maintenance costs of the lane but because of different histories 'x' is not equally split across all properties - obviously not fair, but legally quite clear. Fortunately, all the neighbours are sensible, helpful people and we quickly agreed on a 'residents association' as outlined above. It has been working well for many years now, the lane remains in good condition, payments are a comfortable £10/month per property (regardless of what their deeds specify) and we are close to being able to reduce that as the maintenance fund has built up to a healthy amount.

There may be other ways of managing such things but this one is working for us.

That sounds like a fair way to run things to me.

Not all people in this situation would be as honest/fair/open as that in their way of running things.

From having done this, do you know what ways there are to legally safeguard peoples money in case the person organising this sort of thing isn't a trustworthy sort of person? I do know of a similar situation, but the person that would consider themselves/be considered to be the person to organise this is very untrustworthy in a variety of ways and any payments made to the road account might very well get "diverted" into their own personal monies and so that is a concern as to how to prevent their own personal financial mismanagement impacting on other people in the road. It would be entirely possible that when others in the road said "We have £x set to one side to cover this road maintenance" that it would turn out not to be "accessible" for that purpose, having already been spent by the people concerned on themselves.

SalarySlave

Kis1981 wrote: »

I'm having pretty much exactly the same issue with the house I'm selling!!! The difference being that we do have a management company. We are just waiting to hear from the buyers lender as to whether they are happy to proceed. Very Stressful!

So I have decided to go ahead with the purchase. I am the first house in the street, so if for example a problem does occur with the road, then it is less likely to affect me. Or if a problem occurs that does affect me, then it will affect everyone, as they will all have to drive through it.

The seller has given me an 10 year indemnity insurance, which my lender accepted. This means all costs incurred, my portion will be paid for with the insurance. I do intend to chase up trying to get the road adopted once I get the house. We are due to exchange in the 1st week in September.

More likely is that the best path forward for us is to reinstate the management company (or a new one) as the road is a brick road, and I'm sure the council will not want to adopt it in its current state as its likely more expensive than they would like to maintain.

One disadvantage to not having the management company at the minute is that the bins have to be taken to the end of the street for collection. This is because of insurance apparently. Again as I am the first house it will have little impact on me, unless the neighbours end up blocking me in with their bins of course.

trickydicky802

Access to the maintenance fund was probably my biggest concern, which is why we set up the bank account to require two signatures for any withdrawal. I guess it could have been more signatures if it was deemed necessary. The key point, I think, is that there shouln't be ONE person running the scheme. It should be a community scheme. Yes, it depends to an extent on neighbours being reasonable, though in our case their liability to contribute is enshrined within their deeds so I guess in an extreme case legal action could be taken. Of course, as in most things in life, once legal action is needed things have already gone down the pan.

I previously lived in an area with unadopted private roads and again all the property owners, by deed covenant, were required to pay for the road maintenance. In this case there were probably 50-60 houses and a limited company had been set up to maintain the roads, with the company directors being drawn from the property owners. Anyone/everyone could be a director if they wished but the scheme ran so well that for around £180 per year the roads were better maintained than the local council maintained ones so most people were simply content to just pay the annual fee and not get involved.

The disadvantage of that level of formality is that setting up a limited company will cost something, annual reports need to be filed at companies house, there won't be free banking and an annual audit of accounts will probably be required. In other words, there will be some overhead costs - which is probably bearable for 50-60 properties but for the 10 properties being discussed will likely be quite a significant portion of the funds. Hence why we decided on the route I described above.