Change of access to shared driveway

k1mmie

My neighbour and I have detached properties with a current single dropped kerb outside my property. title deeds show neighbours have shared access through gates and immediate turning onto their driveway. Neighbours submitted planning requests to remove trees and create their own dropped kerb, erect a boundary fence to separate properties and demolish and rebuild their garage. The garage has now been done but they have now approached us to say they want to do the rest of the work with us both splitting the costs. I have said the plans were submitted without discussing this with us and whilst we are happy to pay half of the costs for the separation work and fencing, I do not feel we should be pay towards half of the other costs. What are our rights?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

For what reason do they think you should be paying half?

If your deeds show they have access and you are granting that I can't see any reason why your obligations would extend beyond this. 

You may wish to buy a can of spray paint and draw a line marking where you believe the boundary lies, ensure there is a clear marking at a reference point at either end and take photos as well as ask the neighbours for their opinion. 

Given their apparent unfounded request for payment you are best ensuring the boundary line is firmly agreed between the two of you to save coming home one day and finding part of your land fenced off. 

Another consideration is that this agreement they have to no longer access via your land does not mean that you aren't obligated to continue providing access, as unlikely as it may be if they sold and another owner wished to have access as per the deeds they would be entitled to it.  

It is best that they pay for all work so that in the future you can't be accused of impeding access and face ripping out work you've paid half for to give access.  

The only cost I would consider going halves on them with is that of removing their right of access from your deeds, assuming it's something that can be done (beyond my limited knowledge ) 

kayleighali

Personally I would say that I am happy with the shared access arrangement and if they wish to change that then it is up to them to fund the change.

If you paid half then I would assume you would get a say in who to use, what materials, the general appearance of the changes etc? If not, then I wouldn't be paying a penny. Sounds harsh but just my opinion.

Martin_the_Unjust

If they give up their right to shared access then you will probably be gaining financially (or at least your house will be easier to sell)

It may be worth discussing it with an estate agent before making a decision.

Take into account there may be costs etc involved in getting their right of access removed from deeds etc.

But I wouldn’t dismiss contributing out of hand.

Section62

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

It is best that they pay for all work so that in the future you can't be accused of impeding access and face ripping out work you've paid half for to give access.  

The only cost I would consider going halves on them with is that of removing their right of access from your deeds, assuming it's something that can be done (beyond my limited knowledge ) 

So long as there is no public right, it is usually possible to remove rights of access/passage if all the parties agree.

The cost of getting that agreement (for the benefit of the OP) might equate to half the cost of whatever starting amount the neighbour decides. Plus legal costs. Then it is down to negotiation skills.

I think you are correct that the alternative would be for a boundary fence to be put in, but for the access right to remain. That could have consequences when ownership of either property changes, so the OP might have problems when they come to sell.

It needs the involvement of a solicitor to look at the respective deeds and draw up an agreement.  Particularly if there is a mortgage on either property, as the mortgage company(ies) will also have a view on the changes.

Ant555

Is this one of the layouts where there is a 'single' driveway running between the houses that splits at the rear to garages and you both effectively own half of it?  Or is it 'your' driveway and they simply have right of access to the rear of their house.

is vehicle access required to the rear as I cant work out from the description where the fence is going?  Is it to fence in their own front garden but they still retain access over your land to the rear?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Section62 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

It is best that they pay for all work so that in the future you can't be accused of impeding access and face ripping out work you've paid half for to give access.  

The only cost I would consider going halves on them with is that of removing their right of access from your deeds, assuming it's something that can be done (beyond my limited knowledge ) 

So long as there is no public right, it is usually possible to remove rights of access/passage if all the parties agree.

The cost of getting that agreement (for the benefit of the OP) might equate to half the cost of whatever starting amount the neighbour decides. Plus legal costs. Then it is down to negotiation skills.

I think you are correct that the alternative would be for a boundary fence to be put in, but for the access right to remain. That could have consequences when ownership of either property changes, so the OP might have problems when they come to sell.

It needs the involvement of a solicitor to look at the respective deeds and draw up an agreement.  Particularly if there is a mortgage on either property, as the mortgage company(ies) will also have a view on the changes.

Out of interest if another party is the one blocking access does that remain the OP's responsibility? I appreciate burden of proof as to who blocked it would add complications. 

To save the neighbours asking for a lump of cash to relinquish their access perhaps the OP could convince them it is of benefit to the neighbours themselves in order for them continue with their current plans without any alternations.

If OP displays no interest in removing the access but begins to question the neighbours plans it might keep the ball in OP's court.  

Section62

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Out of interest if another party is the one blocking access does that remain the OP's responsibility? I appreciate burden of proof as to who blocked it would add complications. 

I think the issue here wouldn't be one of 'blocking' as such, but the uncertainty created by having a right of access there, but not apparent in the way the driveway/gardens are actually laid out.

If the right remains, then whoever owns the neighbouring property could have a change of mind and decide to reinstate that access for use.  And even if they don't reinstate it, if you buy a property with its own private driveway and access then most people will expect to get that. Being told that the neighbour still has an effective veto over the gates you might want to put up, or tell you you can't park on part of your 'own' drive, is something that most people would refuse to accept.

One of the key points is whether this is a case of reciprocal rights, or if (as I read the first post) it is a case that the neighbour has a right over the OP's property to access their own drive, but the OP doesn't pass over the neighbour's property. In other words, the OP's drive is wholly on their own land.

If so.....

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

To save the neighbours asking for a lump of cash to relinquish their access perhaps the OP could convince them it is of benefit to the neighbours themselves in order for them continue with their current plans without any alternations.

If OP displays no interest in removing the access but begins to question the neighbours plans it might keep the ball in OP's court.  

...then the OP doesn't have this leverage, as the neighbour can put up a fence and block their own access, without impacting on the OP's access.

However, if the shared driveway was on land owned 50:50 (or similar), as in the typical 1930's semi-style, then the neighbour couldn't go ahead without mutual agreement - and that negotiating strategy would work.

Mojisola

k1mmie said:

My neighbour and I have detached properties with a current single dropped kerb outside my property. title deeds show neighbours have shared access through gates and immediate turning onto their driveway. Neighbours submitted planning requests to remove trees and create their own dropped kerb, erect a boundary fence to separate properties and demolish and rebuild their garage.

A plan would help - are they planning to fence off their current access across your land?

prowla

Are all of the changes on the neighbour's land?

If so, it's theirs to pay for.

If the changes are on the OP's land, then have they been agreed?

TELLIT01

If they are giving up the right of access over your land that needs to be defined fully and properly by a solicitor.  The last thing you, or other occupants of your property, need is somebody looking at the deeds at a later date and insisting that the  right of be reinstated.  If there is a mortgage on either property any change would also have to be agreed by the mortgage holder.