Maintenance / Repairs

jurassic861
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:19 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 10
Number of topics per page: 10

Re: According to User meaning

Post by jurassic861 »

Thanks for your replies. I have read different versions of the answer and some are saying it's divided by the number of herediments, others are saying by usage, etc... so as you can imagine it's quite confusing when you have so many different answers.
Scrambler
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:14 pm

Re: According to User meaning

Post by Scrambler »

From your other thread..
They yesterday agreed that repair is long overdue and happy to contribute
you would seem to be half way there. Go to them with details of what repairs you believe are required, and a cost for doing it, and what you believe would be a fair split. See if they agree with you.
Last edited by Scrambler on Thu Nov 19, 2020 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
stufe35
Posts: 1040
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:06 pm

Re: According to User meaning

Post by stufe35 »

jurassic861 wrote: Thu Nov 19, 2020 7:42 pm some are saying it's divided by the number of herediments,
Can't see that anyone said that ?
jurassic861
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:19 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 10
Number of topics per page: 10

Re: According to User meaning

Post by jurassic861 »

arborlad
Posts: 8902
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: According to User meaning

Post by arborlad »

arborlad wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:42 pm viewtopic.php?f=8&t=21967


Now merged.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
stufe35
Posts: 1040
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:06 pm

Re: According to User meaning

Post by stufe35 »

jurassic861 wrote: Thu Nov 19, 2020 10:29 pm I found it here

https://www.justanswer.co.uk/law/8vq01- ... 20personal.
I don't believe the answer in that link is accurate in the way it would be applied to your situation. Solicitors don't always get it right. I believe our resident solicitor collaborate agrees at the start of this thread that your wording means the proportion paid by each property would be appropriate to the particular circumstances, not split equally (unless that was of course appropriate)

I am on the edge of my sphere of knowledge however and would be interested in the views of others.
jurassic861
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:19 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 10
Number of topics per page: 10

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by jurassic861 »

Surely if that was the case it would read "according to use" not user.
stufe35
Posts: 1040
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:06 pm

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by stufe35 »

Most other examples of deeds say what proportion should be paid. Usually deeds say 'equal or 'fair' or specify a percentage. That leaves us wondering what word is missing in your deeds. The common law position as I understand it is that repair maintenance costs should be split equitably...ie relative to length used, frequency and type of usage. This is after all what is reasonable. I quoted extreme examples at the beginning of this thread to demonstrate the point of how different usage can be and how the law normally caters for this. My belief is that your deeds only mean to reinforce the common law position, but I can see it is open to some interpretation. I am interested in the views of some of our other regular contributors.

I believe the statement 'proportionate according to user ' means costs shall be split proportionately between the users of the track. What proportion is not stated....do you assume equally, or fairly ? I believe the answer has to be fairly.

In your case you dont use the track past your entrance as it only leads to the other houses...so why should you pay for that ?
MacadamB53
Posts: 7295
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 100
Number of topics per page: 50

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by MacadamB53 »

Hi stufe35,

This is after all what is reasonable

that is for the parties concerned to decide - they might base their idea of reasonable on other factors

kind regards, Mac
jurassic861
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:19 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 10
Number of topics per page: 10

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by jurassic861 »

Well I don't think there is any purpose of me trying to argue that I don't use all of it. That could open more cans of.worms.

My view is that we all use the driveway equally (albeit I only use 90% of it). It refers to the contributions by user,.so think if you have the right to use it you should chip in equally.

I suppose remembering the easement is not restricted to use now. Just.because.someone only drives up once a year doesn't mean they can't drive up it once a day in the future.

Just to update the forum on easement issue. I've had a barrister attend my site and he confirmed a gate can be installed but recommended s simple push button one. He suggested I can have a tob and intercom and just a simple push button would satisfy any court that the interfearance was not significant.

Interestly he confirmed although my driveway has no official ROW over the driveway further up the track, it automatically has an implied right under Section 62. It was.never excluded under the previous conveyance.
Scrambler
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:14 pm

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by Scrambler »

Am i right in thinking your neighbours are not allowed to take HGVs along the track ?
Scrambler
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:14 pm

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by Scrambler »

I wouldnt want to pay equally for maintenance to a track where you can drive HGVs along it but i cant...You might not take them up now but...
Just.because.someone only drives up once a year doesn't mean they can't drive up it once a day in the future
---with a HGV.

Someone being you...whilst they cannot.
ukmicky
Posts: 5237
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by ukmicky »

jurassic861 wrote: Sun Nov 22, 2020 10:30 pm Well I don't think there is any purpose of me trying to argue that I don't use all of it. That could open more cans of.worms.

My view is that we all use the driveway equally (albeit I only use 90% of it). It refers to the contributions by user,.so think if you have the right to use it you should chip in equally.

I suppose remembering the easement is not restricted to use now. Just.because.someone only drives up once a year doesn't mean they can't drive up it once a day in the future.

Just to update the forum on easement issue. I've had a barrister attend my site and he confirmed a gate can be installed but recommended s simple push button one. He suggested I can have a tob and intercom and just a simple push button would satisfy any court that the interfearance was not significant.

Interestly he confirmed although my driveway has no official ROW over the driveway further up the track, it automatically has an implied right under Section 62. It was.never excluded under the previous conveyance.
Really ,you had a barrister attend and he has put all this in writing.?
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
jurassic861
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:19 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 10
Number of topics per page: 10

Re: Maintenance / Repairs

Post by jurassic861 »

Regarding the maintenance, it is clear from the term according to user, and not use would mean that if you use it you contribute.

Yes though his report is too long to repeat I'll give you the main points he raised.

Kingsgate Development Projects Ltd v Jordan where the ruling was that a push button was not deemed an obstruction. Agreement was made that fobs and codes get lost and visitors to the land may not have the code in advanced. He is satisfied that the gate is far enough off the highway to not cause any issues for cars to stop, disembark and push a button. What supports this argument is precious gate posts are evident which would mean that historically gates would have once upon a time been in existence.

Wood v Waddington case decides that S62 can apply when when there is no diversity of occupation.

As he rightly pointed out, no barrister or law professional can give a cast iron Guarentee but his experience speaks volumes and what I like about this chap was he give case law examples of decisions in both directions and highlighted the relevance of the case in my example.

I can say that going though this has taught me that.local solicitors are simply not clued up enough to give you an accurate and up to date conclusion. Barristers who I had on a direct access basis that specialise in this issues are much better positioned to give a good strong suggestion on what way of the wind your sailing when putting up gates.
Post Reply