Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
At the back of our property there is an access track leading to the backs of a number of properties. Our deeds (1904ish) say that we should pay due proportion upkeep of this road, which we do. (Approx £10/yr). Approx 10 years ago the owner of this right of way (our neighbour)signed it over in trust to his family. This meant that his house insurance no longer covered this road. He took out public liability insurance road and has been charging us and our other neighbours proportionally ever since. Although we continue to pay our share of the upkeep, we have never paid anything towards the insurance as we were advised at the time by a solicitor patient of ours that we did not have to. The public liability is not covering us - it is covering him. We therefore owe over £100 insurance if it is indeed our responsibility. So the question is: Who should pay public liability, the residents that back on to the road or the road owner? Thanks Faye
PS the quote said £28 if I was not in a hurry and the charge has come up £38
Thank you advice. I was quoted £38 initially , which was more than I wanted to pay so I extended the time frame to "not in a hurry" and the price dropped to £28, which I felt was OK. When I proceeded to the next page the price had gone up again to £38 and I could not go back to review. Am I worrying unnecessarily and your company have only debited me £28 or does something need fixing?
Have customer services contacted you and resolved your query?
As the situation has been going on 10 years and we have been refusing to pay, the debt has never been written off, but accrued year on year insurance, has a precedent been set ? Conversely neighbours who have been paying it, are they obliged to continue? Could they stop payment now and even claim the money back.
Sorry delay in the response I have been away.
PS Customer services have refunded the money thank you.
You have nothing to worry abou the "ongoing debt". The fact they have never taken legal action to recover the insurance just implies to me that they know they are legally entitled to pursue you . Indeed, a party has only 6 years to chase a debt, so even if the insurance was legally payable (which it isn't), they could now only pursue you years worth of the insurance.
The owner of the access can legally stop insuring it, if they deem it necessary- however, they and only they are legally responsible possible negligence claims made by a third party , so they would be foolish to stop insuring the access.
I hope this helps and clarifies the legal position.
"They know they are legally entitled to persue you is this right or have you missed a word out?
What about the neighbours are they entitled to claim money back?
Apologies-should have said "not legally..."
As regards ***** ***** as they have "agreed" to pay by handing over their monies, they will find it hard to recover the payments they have made.