Thank you for the quick reply and apologies for the confusion.
The private road is within my property boundary and others have right of way to access the garages behind.
In the absence of anything specific in the deeds aboutresponsibility for upkeep of the road, then the legal doctrine of mutualbenefit and burden applies. This says that people who use the road areresponsible for the repair of it in proportion to the amount they use it.
I would need to see the 99 year lease to see exactly what rightsare granted and to who. So, it may be possible for the regard is to bedemolished and the place turned into a car park (for which the owner may wantto charge) but it may not be possible for the owner to have people going up anddown into his new car park. The solicitor will advise you on this when he hasthe lease in front of him. If you let me have the wording in the lease, I cantell you also.
If your conveyancer is baffled by the whole thing, then tell theconveyancer to pass it on to someone who is not baffled or find anotherconveyancer.
With regard to 3, I am not altogether certain what it is that youcollect from the three neighbouring properties. Can you please let me know theexact wording?
Finally, I can tell you that there is nothing to stop the owner atthe back pulling down the garages and turning it into hardstanding, it is onlythe access which could be the contentious sticking point.
Does that answer the question? Can I assist further or answer anyspecific queries?
If you have not done already, please don't forget to positivelyrate my answer service even if it was not what you wanted to hear. You shouldnow see a series of buttons which enable you to rate my answer serviceformally.If you don't rate it positively, then the site keep your deposit and I get 0for my time. It is imperative that you give my answer a positive rating. It doesn't give me, "a pat on the head", "good boy" (like ebay), it is mylivelihood!If in ratings you feel that you expected more or it only helped a little,please ask. The thread does remain open for me to answer follow-up questions after ratingmy answer service.Rating doesn't close the enquiry at all even though the site may give thatimpression. It remains open for you to read and ask for further clarification.Regards.
PS Experts on here are online and off-line all day each day and weekendsso please bear with me if I do not get back to you immediately.
Thanks for this,
Just for clarification, the text stated in the original deed is as follows:
"The parts of the land as may be affected thereby are subject to the rights of way; rights of passage and running of water and soil and rights in respect of gas and electricity services granted by Leases of Maisonettes (plus garages) Nod. 1 to 8 (inclusive) Bedford Avenue and 9 to 12 (inclusive) and 14 to 25 (inclusive) Chalfont Avenue Such Leases were granted for terms of 99 years from 29 September 1960 (as to Nos. 18 toXXXXX and 99 years from 25 December 1960 (as to the remainder)"
"The use of the Service Media pathway party walls and any other things now or to be constructed by the transferor intended for shared use by the Transferee and the owners of any other parts of the Estate are subject to the Transferee paying a fair proportion of the costs incurred in their inspection maintenance and renewal by the persons sharing their use and any dispute about the amount to be paid will be settled by the written certificate of an independant surveyor acting as an expert."
I don't have a copy of the rights of way lease, trying to find this still.
It is not particularly wellworded but what that says to me is that there is a right of way in favour ofthe leases and the garages. It doesn't say (I would need the whole conveyancingfile which is obviously not practical) that the world and its mother can accessa car park around the back of the house.
I think I would still want to seeat least one of the 99 year leases.
The point with regard to theservices is quite normal in that you pay a proportion of the cost ofmaintaining and repairing them according to use.
This is one of those houseswhere, if you are not happy with it, don't buy it. I think you also need tomake copious enquiries of the seller as to any problems they have encounteredor costs they have incurred with regard to the access
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).