Boundaries and access.

[thejudderman]

My partner has recently bought a house with right of access across to an ajoining house. Since buying and moving in she has found the neighbours use the access as their car park.(there was never anyone there whenever she viewed)
The people she bought the house from never mentioned any problems with parking although she has since found out that they were quite often complaining about it.
The neighbours have been there for 13 yrs and claim to have parked there all that time. One question is..... Do they have any right to use it as their car park because of the time they have been doing so? Their solicitor seems to suggest they do!
There is NOTHING mentioned in any of the papers, plans, and deeds etc, legal or other wise to suggest the neighbour has parking rights. It is only mentioned as ACCESS. And my partner bought the property believing it to be only an access.
After several solicitors letters to and fro nothing seems to be getting settled and its getting rather expensive.
My partners solicitor started off being full of confidence saying the neighbours havent got a leg to stand on if it should go to court and not to worry about expenses because the neighbour will be ordered to pay her costs. But now the confidence seems to have gone and its being suggested my partner and neighbour sit down and talk about it.
My partner needs the access to reverse into to get out, otherwise she has to reverse all the way out on to the road.
One thing I should point out is, the neighbours dont have parking space except for a garage which if they park in front of it their car is in the access, and then they park another car and or motorbikes in front of that. And also they bought their property knowing it had no parking space.
Any advice from those in the know will be very much appreciated

Thanks in advance.

[bednobs]

well if your partner is paying a solicitor to advise her, i would be taking the advice of the solicitor TBH. It's really difficult to comment without knowing what the wording says - it could just be for access on foot for all we know

[thejudderman]

I cant remember the exact wording but it is access on foot and motor vehicles...... The big question is the time thing. Its being suggested that they have rights because they have parked there for so long. Even though the previous owners of my partners house was often asking them to move.

[tonywiltshire]

If the previous owners of the property had asked the neighbour to move their car frequently, and they did not do so, they should have declared a dispute with the neighbour when your Partner purchased the property. If they did not do so take the matter up with the Solicitor who handled the conveyance.

[buildersmate]

To start with bednobs is right that the solicitor should be dealing with it.
It looks like either the solicitor has fouled up or (as Tony says) the seller had an obligation to disclose any difficulties they had in terms of disputes with neighbours (there is a standard enquiries question that purchaser's solicitor asks the seller's solicitor about disputes).
Next, the owner of the land has every right to park on his land, HOWEVER if there is an easement in place then the neighbour is obliged to enable the terms of the easement to be met. This is unfortunately where things can get fouled up because if the easement just says a right of access by motor vehicle and nothing more then there is no clear definition about the width of the access that is required. The solicitor should have picked up on this, even if the sellers incoreectly failed to acknowledge a previous problem.
Force the issue with the solicitor, if no joy, complain in writing to the head of practice.