Shared access issue - advice needed

[Kentlife1996]

Good morning, 

 

Our neighbours have a permissive access over our driveway. This is only for large vehicles that cannot fit through their main driveway and for emergency vehicles - this is written in the contract of sale and transfer.
 

They cannot use without our prior consent save in case of emergencies. 
 

We cannot refuse or delay consent unless deemed ‘reasonable’. Does anybody know where reasonableness lies legally? We are in discussions with our solicitor but just wondering about other people’s experiences and thoughts. 
 

The neighbours have commenced construction of a large sand school which they can only continue with the use of our access for the machinery and many lorry loads of materials (will be around 100 loads apparently. They have no planning permission for this and we feel this is unreasonable and excessive use of our access (bearing in mind this is our only drive, they have another entrance to their property) but unsure what constitutes ‘unreasonable’ 

 

any thoughts? 

 

Edited Monday at 11:03 by Kentlife1996

[Galileo]

Unless the frequency of use was specifically outlined in the deeds, then If you want a definition of reasonable, you'll be going down the route of talking to solicitors. On the face of it, does rather come across as you don't like the idea of the equestrian "sand school" being constructed and wish to be obstructive in some way?

 

With reasonable, as in being what the "man on the Clapham omnibus" would think, then on the information supplied the easement appears to be being used as intended, for large vehicles that are unable to fit down your neighbour's drive. Grounds for you to reasonable refuse consent would be if it affected health, or your own quiet enjoyment perhaps, but then the neighbour would probably hate you, and instruct their own solicitors and the only winners will be the producers of heart medication and the solicitors. These matters are always best decided over a cup of tea and a chat, not in a courtroom or by being obstructive.

[Kentlife1996]

We are not against the sandschool so to speak.

 

I am equestrian myself so this is not the issue. 
 

Our issue is we have already had a lot of damage on our property, from the access being used as a turning area, unloading area and being used without permission at times. We have so far been neighbourly and allowed access as written in the contract, however we feel is becoming excessive, so just looking at options. 
 

We have tried discussion and also offered to transfer them land so they can form an access of their own that would be suitable, but not having much luck. 

[Galileo]

Ah, that additional information adds useful context. NAL but I would suggest that whilst outright refusing could be considered unreasonable, adding conditions for consent which could include a written agreement to be provided by the neighbour to make good any deterioration of the surface caused by the additional traffic, and to restrict traffic movements to a specific timeframe and frequency etc. would be reasonable.

[Redbeard]

36 minutes ago, Galileo said:

adding conditions for consent which could include a written agreement to be provided by the neighbour to make good any deterioration of the surface caused by the additional traffic, and to restrict traffic movements to a specific timeframe and frequency etc. would be reasonable.

+1 to that.

[Spinny]

I don't think it is that uncommon to have a shared driveway. I might guess there would be some legal precedence about whether the right to access implies an obligation to pay towards damage rectification or maintenance.

 

But another +1 to Galileo because there may be questions beyond this building of a horse training ring (which should itself be a one off (or a hundred off) because to me there is the implication that this horse training/riding facility will be there to be used, so might imply regular traffic with people pulling up with horse boxes, or in 4X4's to drop kids off for horse riding lessons, or watch the weekly gymkhana ?

 

Installing locking gates and/or bollards might be one way of giving you control and forcing proper requests for access. Emergency services could have access to a key or a key box. If you had a suitable access control method then it might also be used to provide a full record of access by your neighbour to demonstrate reasonableness or not. The emergency services access seems a little odd as I would have thought the emergency services means ambulance or fire brigade and I would expect respecting property rights to be the last consideration of either service in a true emergency anyway - is their 'main drive' definitely too small for an ambulance ? Also emergency access implies you cannot ever park on the drive as an emergency can occur any any time.

 

Perhaps consider when the permissive access was established, by whom, and why it would have been done originally.