How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask ivorylounge Your Own Question
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 33385
Experience:  Barrister at Self Employed Barrister
Type Your Law Question Here...
ivorylounge is online now

We own a 345square metre drive, three others have got the right of access over the drive.

This answer was rated:

We own a 345square metre drive, three others have got the right of access over the drive. After 19 years of fire fighting pot holes, we decided to have the driveway resurfaced. We had numerous quotes for various solutions, we chose one of the most economic in consideration of our neighbours. We notified them, included copies of all the quotes, no one notified me of any objections. I sent out invoices for 1/4 of the cost, one person has paid, the others refuse, saying "We do not have the right to charge". I believe the Doctrine of Mutual Benefit applies but do not wish to embark on costly legal action if I am incorrect.
Can you advise please
Is there actually a clause in the deeds - a repairing covenant?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Within out Deeds there is no mention of a repairing covenant, wording "A right of way at all times and for all purposes with or without vehicles over the driveway between points"
Ok thanks. There is a general principle of the mutual benefit and burden principle which has been reinforced by the Court of Appeal. In Goodman v Ellwood the Court of Appeal held, because the individual owners were enjoying the benefit of using the road, they were bound by the associated burden, i.e. to pay a contribution. As such you have a right to charge. I hope that this helps - please rate positive.
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Thanks, ***** ***** clarify if our apportionment of 25% to each user would be deemed reasonable? Also did we have an obligation to get agreement of the amount due from each prior to getting the work done? Can we pursue through the small claims court?
That will be a matter for the court and would be based on a case by case. The court could consider that to be unreasonable on the basis that they do not access the whole of the path or fair if they do access the whole of the path. It would always have been better to have sought there obligation first and show them who you were proposing to undertake the work. Depending upon the sums involved you can seek to resolve through the small claims process. Please rate positive.
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
As mentioned , I sent a letter of our proposal with copies of all quotes and indicated the contractor and price. Work was not undertaken until three weeks after notification of our intentions. I did ask for confirmation of acceptance but admit as no one contacted me I went ahead.
That is very helpful - you will be able to show to the judge that you acted reasonably in such circumstances. Please rate positive. Thanks
ivorylounge and other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Thank you, ***** ***** now relax a little.

My pleasure - please remember to rate - thanks