Rights of Access and Parking on Private Driveway

eddddy

GDB2222 said:

I am happy to contribute X% of the reasonable cost of the driveway maintenance. You asked for Y%, but I don’t think that is fair because I am on a pension and we only use the first few yards of the driveway.”

Before making an offer, I think I'd ask for clarification...

• "You asked for Y% of the cost of driveway maintenance. Can you clarify whether you believe I have a legal obligation to pay this, or whether you are asking me to pay this as a voluntary gesture of goodwill?"

And rather than making an uncapped, open ended goodwill offer to pay X% of future maintenance, maybe just commit to one payment ay a time. For example,

• "Please let me know what maintenance is planned, and the relevant costs"

• If, for example, the reply is "The drive will be resurfaced, including your parking area, in June 2024 at an estimated cost of £10k"

• You can decide what "one-off" contribution (if any) you want to offer (saying that you are doing so as a gesture of goodwill, and without accepting that you have liability for any further maintenance).

Section62

GDB2222 said:

A lot of the stuff above is not going to alleviate your stress, Hayley.

So,  let me point out that you have a low stress option that is unlikely to cost very much. You could write something along the following lines:

”Dear Neighbour 

I think that I have the right to park here anyway, but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park. 

I am happy to contribute X% of the reasonable cost of the driveway maintenance. You asked for Y%, but I don’t think that is fair because I am on a pension and we only use the first few yards of the driveway.”

I wouldn’t worry about the signs. They are pointless. 

I wouldn't do that before doing some more research - i.e. finding out from the OP's deeds whether they have a right to drive a vehicle over this driveway and finding out who owns the different areas of land.  By the sound of things the OP may own part of the land, and I wouldn't take it as given that the developer of the new houses owns the driveway, even though they coughed up for surfacing it.

If the driveway only went to the new development then the OP might be in a weaker position, but their comment about it also passing behind their property (and others) needs to be explored futher.  If this is one of those rear access tracks (of the type typical of 1930/40's housing) then the OP may have a right to use it with zero liability for maintenance.

Arguing that they should only pay for a few metres from where the park to the public road may fail if they also have a right of access to the rear of the property.  Whether or not they use the rear access is irrelevant if the right is there, and voluntarily giving up the rear access right (to save on maintenance costs) would be inadvisable, especially if there is limited (or no) parking at the front of the property.

I'd also suggest "...but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park." is problematic because it would suggest the OP is accepting the position that they are being given permission to park, rather than parking as of right.  Permission can be withdrawn.  In which case then establishing there was a right to park can be trickier if it was previously accepted that parking was by permission.

But this just highlights that without seeing the layout on a plan (or some pictures) it is really difficult to give meaningful advice.

GDB2222

Section62 said:

GDB2222 said:

A lot of the stuff above is not going to alleviate your stress, Hayley.

So,  let me point out that you have a low stress option that is unlikely to cost very much. You could write something along the following lines:

”Dear Neighbour 

I think that I have the right to park here anyway, but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park. 

I am happy to contribute X% of the reasonable cost of the driveway maintenance. You asked for Y%, but I don’t think that is fair because I am on a pension and we only use the first few yards of the driveway.”

I wouldn’t worry about the signs. They are pointless. 

I wouldn't do that before doing some more research - i.e. finding out from the OP's deeds whether they have a right to drive a vehicle over this driveway and finding out who owns the different areas of land.  By the sound of things the OP may own part of the land, and I wouldn't take it as given that the developer of the new houses owns the driveway, even though they coughed up for surfacing it.

If the driveway only went to the new development then the OP might be in a weaker position, but their comment about it also passing behind their property (and others) needs to be explored futher.  If this is one of those rear access tracks (of the type typical of 1930/40's housing) then the OP may have a right to use it with zero liability for maintenance.

Arguing that they should only pay for a few metres from where the park to the public road may fail if they also have a right of access to the rear of the property.  Whether or not they use the rear access is irrelevant if the right is there, and voluntarily giving up the rear access right (to save on maintenance costs) would be inadvisable, especially if there is limited (or no) parking at the front of the property.

I'd also suggest "...but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park." is problematic because it would suggest the OP is accepting the position that they are being given permission to park, rather than parking as of right.  Permission can be withdrawn.  In which case then establishing there was a right to park can be trickier if it was previously accepted that parking was by permission.

But this just highlights that without seeing the layout on a plan (or some pictures) it is really difficult to give meaningful advice.

The fundamental question here is how much money and energy Hayley wants to put into this. It’s clear the neighbour’s just passing the cap round to pay for anticipated driveway repairs and doesn’t care about her parking. The cheapest option might just be to put some money in the cap. 

Alternatively, Hayley needs to get  legal advice. I don’t think she should rely on well meaning amateurs on the internet. The CAB might be able to help her. However, if she goes to a solicitor, it could be expensive. And of course she can’t tell what the advice will be. 

eddddy

Taking a step back - it's quite possible that the neighbour just decided to send the letter based on a whim, without having done any research, or reading any deeds, or taking any legal advice.

When somebody unexpectedly writes to you saying you owe them money (or you will owe them money in the future), a good starting point is to write back to say "Please provide some evidence that I will owe you the money."



The neighbour might have invested a total of 10 minutes effort in speculatively writing a letter to say "You must pay me some money for maintaining the drive".

If that's the case, you don't really want to spend hours or days trying to disprove the content of a frivolous letter.

Section62

GDB2222 said:

Section62 said:

GDB2222 said:

A lot of the stuff above is not going to alleviate your stress, Hayley.

So,  let me point out that you have a low stress option that is unlikely to cost very much. You could write something along the following lines:

”Dear Neighbour 

I think that I have the right to park here anyway, but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park. 

I am happy to contribute X% of the reasonable cost of the driveway maintenance. You asked for Y%, but I don’t think that is fair because I am on a pension and we only use the first few yards of the driveway.”

I wouldn’t worry about the signs. They are pointless. 

I wouldn't do that before doing some more research - i.e. finding out from the OP's deeds whether they have a right to drive a vehicle over this driveway and finding out who owns the different areas of land.  By the sound of things the OP may own part of the land, and I wouldn't take it as given that the developer of the new houses owns the driveway, even though they coughed up for surfacing it.

If the driveway only went to the new development then the OP might be in a weaker position, but their comment about it also passing behind their property (and others) needs to be explored futher.  If this is one of those rear access tracks (of the type typical of 1930/40's housing) then the OP may have a right to use it with zero liability for maintenance.

Arguing that they should only pay for a few metres from where the park to the public road may fail if they also have a right of access to the rear of the property.  Whether or not they use the rear access is irrelevant if the right is there, and voluntarily giving up the rear access right (to save on maintenance costs) would be inadvisable, especially if there is limited (or no) parking at the front of the property.

I'd also suggest "...but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park." is problematic because it would suggest the OP is accepting the position that they are being given permission to park, rather than parking as of right.  Permission can be withdrawn.  In which case then establishing there was a right to park can be trickier if it was previously accepted that parking was by permission.

But this just highlights that without seeing the layout on a plan (or some pictures) it is really difficult to give meaningful advice.

The fundamental question here is how much money and energy Hayley wants to put into this. It’s clear the neighbour’s just passing the cap round to pay for anticipated driveway repairs and doesn’t care about her parking. The cheapest option might just be to put some money in the cap. 

Alternatively, Hayley needs to get  legal advice. I don’t think she should rely on well meaning amateurs on the internet. The CAB might be able to help her. However, if she goes to a solicitor, it could be expensive. And of course she can’t tell what the advice will be. 

I'm not sure it is that clear.  "Upkeep" can cover a lot more than just surfacing the drive - e.g. £50 towards the cost of our new 'Private Driveway' signs? Maybe money to fund a 'man' to cut the grass and weed the unsurfaced parts once a week?   If the driveway has only been surfaced recently then it shouldn't need significant work doing to it for years.  If it does need repairs already then that would point to the work being substandard and much higher repair bills to follow.

eddddy is right that this is potentially just a speculative move and it is equally possible the individual has no authority to act on behalf of the driveway owner.  The OP doesn't need to invest hours of time and energy to do some of the basics - such as digging out a copy of their deeds - which would need to be done anyway if professional legal advice is being sought.

The first question it is always worth asking in a situation is "Do I have the right to do the thing I'm doing?".  The answer to that should usually determine the tone and substance of the response.

GDB2222

Section62 said:

GDB2222 said:

Section62 said:

GDB2222 said:

A lot of the stuff above is not going to alleviate your stress, Hayley.

So,  let me point out that you have a low stress option that is unlikely to cost very much. You could write something along the following lines:

”Dear Neighbour 

I think that I have the right to park here anyway, but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park. 

I am happy to contribute X% of the reasonable cost of the driveway maintenance. You asked for Y%, but I don’t think that is fair because I am on a pension and we only use the first few yards of the driveway.”

I wouldn’t worry about the signs. They are pointless. 

I wouldn't do that before doing some more research - i.e. finding out from the OP's deeds whether they have a right to drive a vehicle over this driveway and finding out who owns the different areas of land.  By the sound of things the OP may own part of the land, and I wouldn't take it as given that the developer of the new houses owns the driveway, even though they coughed up for surfacing it.

If the driveway only went to the new development then the OP might be in a weaker position, but their comment about it also passing behind their property (and others) needs to be explored futher.  If this is one of those rear access tracks (of the type typical of 1930/40's housing) then the OP may have a right to use it with zero liability for maintenance.

Arguing that they should only pay for a few metres from where the park to the public road may fail if they also have a right of access to the rear of the property.  Whether or not they use the rear access is irrelevant if the right is there, and voluntarily giving up the rear access right (to save on maintenance costs) would be inadvisable, especially if there is limited (or no) parking at the front of the property.

I'd also suggest "...but there’s no point arguing about it as you are happy for me to continue to park." is problematic because it would suggest the OP is accepting the position that they are being given permission to park, rather than parking as of right.  Permission can be withdrawn.  In which case then establishing there was a right to park can be trickier if it was previously accepted that parking was by permission.

But this just highlights that without seeing the layout on a plan (or some pictures) it is really difficult to give meaningful advice.

The fundamental question here is how much money and energy Hayley wants to put into this. It’s clear the neighbour’s just passing the cap round to pay for anticipated driveway repairs and doesn’t care about her parking. The cheapest option might just be to put some money in the cap. 

Alternatively, Hayley needs to get  legal advice. I don’t think she should rely on well meaning amateurs on the internet. The CAB might be able to help her. However, if she goes to a solicitor, it could be expensive. And of course she can’t tell what the advice will be. 

I'm not sure it is that clear.  "Upkeep" can cover a lot more than just surfacing the drive - e.g. £50 towards the cost of our new 'Private Driveway' signs? Maybe money to fund a 'man' to cut the grass and weed the unsurfaced parts once a week?   If the driveway has only been surfaced recently then it shouldn't need significant work doing to it for years.  If it does need repairs already then that would point to the work being substandard and much higher repair bills to follow.

eddddy is right that this is potentially just a speculative move and it is equally possible the individual has no authority to act on behalf of the driveway owner.  The OP doesn't need to invest hours of time and energy to do some of the basics - such as digging out a copy of their deeds - which would need to be done anyway if professional legal advice is being sought.

The first question it is always worth asking in a situation is "Do I have the right to do the thing I'm doing?".  The answer to that should usually determine the tone and substance of the response.

It would be useful to know the current state of the driveway. Until the housing development, there were probably some cars using it, plus maybe the odd van. Now, with the new houses, there's presumably the refuse truck every week, plus maybe regular supermarket deliveries. Unless the drive was prepared to a good standard, it could be cracking up already.

Section62

GDB2222 said:

Section62 said:

It would be useful to know the current state of the driveway. Until the housing development, there were probably some cars using it, plus maybe the odd van. Now, with the new houses, there's presumably the refuse truck every week, plus maybe regular supermarket deliveries. Unless the drive was prepared to a good standard, it could be cracking up already.

Good point.  Although possibly a reason not to agree to take on any liability for maintenance if none currently exists.

As a general rule local authority waste/recycling services won't take their vehicles down private driveways - the resident(s) is expected to take their waste/recycling to the nearest public road.  If the driveway the OP is concerned with is large enough for waste collection vehicles to use then that may make the parking issue more significant in the future.

Grumpy_chap

I would not make any offer to pay any maintenance costs of the driveway until after I had reviewed the deeds for the property to establish whether I had right to pass and repass over that land in any case and whether that right imposed any obligations with regard to maintenance costs.