Right of access query

greco_2

I bought my house 5 years ago which is one of three houses accessed by a gravelled drive. My house is the first one and the two neighbours have to drive past to reach their properties. They were built around 25 years ago and the original occupants have long gone. When I bought mine, I was told that a limited company existed which owned the driveway with three directors who all own the houses. The reason for this was unclear but it was suggested that this was to ensure that all had right of access. The company is dormant with no assets but obviously there is a requirement to file accounts etc at Companies House. The previous Company Secretary whose responsibility this is has sold his house and no one wants to take it on.
My question is that if the company is wound up, do the neighbours have automatic right of access given the length of time since the properties were built. There seems to be no point in keeping the company going if it has outlived its purpose. My concern would be that any future prospective buyer might encounter difficulties if ownership of the driveway is unclear.

user1977

There seems to be no point in keeping the company going if it has outlived its purpose.

Surely its purpose is to own the driveway? If the company is simply allowed to be dissolved then the driveway ends up being owned by the Crown. Which could be considerably more hassle than simply doing the admin for the company to continue.

flaneurs_lobster

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82190789#Comment_82190789

At some point that driveway may need some maintenance and it will be easier to decide on and collect the funds to do it if there is still joint ownership (and responsibility).

Section62

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82190789#Comment_82190789

Notwithstanding the OP's "which owned the driveway", the company might just exist for maintenance purposes.

Personally I wouldn't agree to the company being wound up without clarity over ownership/rights/responsibilities. A limited company is often the easiest way of achieving this, the hassle of running it is small compared to the potential hassle if an unowned driveway with no maintenance agreement requires work doing to it.

ExEstateAgent

Do your deeds mention right of way over the driveway? You need to check what yours and your neighbours deeds state.

I expect the company was set up as a 'shared freehold' arrangement over the driveway to ensure each party has equal rights and are responsible for the upkeep.

You don't need to have a company as long as all parties agree over rights and obligations but it's probably better to avoid future disputes.

eddddy

When you and your neighbours bought your houses, did you sign deeds saying that the company would maintain the road, and each homeowner would contribute to the cost (maybe 1/3rd each)?

If so, that would be a legally enforceable agreement.

If the company is dissolved, ownership of the road will pass to the Crown - and they would not be required to perform the duties specified in the deed.

So there would be no way of 'forcing' anyone to maintain the road, and no way of 'forcing' anyone to pay.

If nothing else, that might be flagged as a major problem when you eventually want to sell your house.

WIAWSNB

Hi Greco.

Do each house's deeds say anything regarding ownership and rights over the drive? If so, what? Or is the drive referred to solely in the 'articles of association' for this company?

The new house owner doesn't want to continue the role of secretary - is that it? And this also applies to you and the other homeowner? That's understandable, I guess, but I suspect a shortsighted move, so how about this tiny task is rotated between you all on a, say, 2-yearly basis?

The requirement for this 'filing of accounts' must be pretty minimal, and all the info required to complete it freely available on t'net. The 'company' sounds the most ideal setup for you all, other than - what? - the company 'selling' the drive to the three of you, and you all updating your deeds? Or selling to just one of you if it's simpler, with ditto 3xdeeds updates to ensure your individual rights? Or, sell each bit of drive to the adjacent homeowner, and all retain a RoW? Or sell to each and don't have a RoW beyond your bit, and contribute fractionally less to maintenance? Or...

But, blimey, why do this? It would surely be many £undreds each in legal costs? What you currently have seemingly works, and all three directors have a vote on any decisions.

Alternatively, I guess the new owner could resign their directorship, and one of the others takes on two - an extremely bonkers move by the new guy as they'd lose the right to vote. And equally bonkers for the other owner, as one is out-voted.

Unless it's obvious that there's a painless alternative, then it seems to me the sensible solution is to stick with what you know and works. After all, the ol' secretary seemingly managed to sell their house with no issues with this setup.

If you really cannot face the task of submitting accounts, then engage a local accountant to do so, and - after they've stopped laughing - this will still be cheaper than 'selling' to yourselves and having deeds changed.

(The above is an uninformed opinion, but I was once one of the directors of a property management co, an old house split into 4 flats. It was very straightforward to manage.)

Bigphil1474

If I owned the third house, I'd definitely want the company to continue. Being in the first house, it may be less of an issue for you, but they need the whole drive maintaining as they have to use all of it. If I owned the first house, I would expect the first third to be the responsibility of all of you, the second third between 2 and 3, and the final third for the 3rd house though. Might be worth reading all the terms.

greco_2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82191424#Comment_82191424

Thank you. None of the previous directors wanted to take responsibility for submission of the accounts even though it is a minimal task. I think we should just carry on with the limited company and go with your suggestion to rotate responsibility. Thank you for your helpful input.