Interpreting Title Document Access Rights

Woolsery

May I pick the brains of legally minded forumites to check that what I read into a paragraph our title document means what I think it means? We'll be taking the matter forward later via our solicitor in the proper manner, but in the meantime I want to be clear I'm not mistaken.

We have a long garden and running parallel to it is a straight private road and verge administered by the management company of a nearby development. The road is separated from our land by a bank and hedge which we own and maintain. We have access rights over the road and pay a set proportion of  maintenance costs for this.

On the plan the road and verge is all tinted yellow.

The paragraph in question reads:

"The land has the benefit of the following rights reserved by a Conveyance of adjoining land dated 1 February 1989 made between (1) Frederick Stuart Smith and Julia Elizabeth Smith (Vendors) and (2) Overbeck Rural Developments Limited (Purchaser) :-

SUBJECT TO.....the exception and reservation unto the Vendors and their successors in title to the Vendors retained land and any part or parts thereof capable of being benefited thereby of a right of way at all times and for all purposes in connection with the present or any future use and enjoyment of the Vendors said retained land over the yellow land."

There are no other paragraphs relating to this roadway.  I think this means as owners of the retained land we have the right to use it for access, crossing the verge at any point along the section bordering our property. In other words, if we wanted to create a new point of access apart from the one shown on the title plan, we could do so.

Am I correct? 

canaldumidi

I think so.

Section62

Woolsery said:

There are no other paragraphs relating to this roadway.  I think this means as owners of the retained land we have the right to use it for access, crossing the verge at any point along the section bordering our property. In other words, if we wanted to create a new point of access apart from the one shown on the title plan, we could do so.

Am I correct? 

There are precedents that suggest a person owning land bordering a private right of way (and having that right themselves) may access the RoW from any point along the common boundary unless the contrary is specified anywhere.

The owned land needs to be adjacent to the RoW - so in your case if the right exists on both the road and verge, and there is nothing else between them and your land, then I agree with canaldumidi's "I think so".

(if there was something like a retaining wall along the boundary then it could get more complicated)

Woolsery

Thanks, both.  The previous owners of our house (whose names I changed) owned many acres here and retained this property plus one other for at least 10 years after they sold the nearby land and buildings for development. It stands to reason they would have given themselves sufficient rights to do as they wished with the remaining acreage.

The original access our house has been altered and another not shown on the plan added at some time, but in order to make the best of developing an outbuilding, we'd like a third. We've already let our plans be known, rather than presenting neighbours with a sudden application, but they don't yet know about our intentions for an extra entrance. They won't like it, of course, but it's only for about 20 tractor/baler movements every year.