16 years ago I built an extension and formed a driveway into my property (all with relevant planning/building warrants). What I never got around to was dropping the kerb to form a "suitably" constructed crossing. Yesterday I recieved a letter from the council stating it had been brought to their attention that a vehicle is being driven across the footway in front of my property and that if I intend to use it to park my car in my property then I will have to construct a suitable crossing. Aside from a cost of around £1500 I would also have to lower an 8ft wall to 1 metre, 20 feet in length reducing my privacy significantly. Not one time in 16 years have I had an incident and the only damage that may have occured is to my own vehicle bumping it up and down a shallow kerb.

Is there anything I could do in this situation?

Thanks for any guidance.

Ian in Scotland

Unless the law in Scotland is significantly different to that in England, if you want to drive over the pavement you absolutely have to have a proper crossing put in and have the kerb lowered. I imagine the requirement to lower your wall is for safety reasons so that you can see and be seen when accessing your property.

I imagine the rules may have changed in the last 16 years regarding the lowering of your wall, but the rest is pretty much standard and has been for a long time. There may well be pipes/cables beneath the pavement which could be damaged by you driving over them, hence the need to construct a proper crossing. The fact that you've never had an incident in the past doesn't mean that one wouldn't happen in the future. Apart from anything else, a lowered kerb is a pretty big signal to pedestrians to take care.

That said, the best course of action may be to get someone from the planning department to come and have a chat about the minimum you could get away with. It would probably be helpful to have copies of your original approved plans available. If they can see that privacy is going to be a significant issue they may be willing to negotiate.

Have any neighbours recently got drop kerbs in your street ? It might be worth asking them before the council, just in case there is a need for a difference in council tax as it might raise the property value slightly.

You could also consider buying a tracked vehicle, then you do not have to install a drop kerb as the tracks are laid vertically rather than any forward movement over the kerb.

New access over verges and footways.

(1)Where, in the opinion of the roads authority, vehicles when driven to or from premises adjacent to a public road are habitually being taken across that road’s verge or footway other than by way of a satisfactory vehicular crossing they may serve a notice on the owner or occupier of the premises requiring that—

(a)by such date as is specified in the notice he shall have commenced; and

(b)within such period thereafter as is, and to such detailed specifications as are, so specified he shall have completed,

the construction of such a crossing over the affected part of the verge or footway.

(2)A vehicular crossing constructed under or by virtue of this section shall on completion be part of the public road.

(3)A person upon whom a notice has been served under sub-section (1) above may within 28 days of such service refer the matter by summary application to the sheriff; and the decision of the sheriff on the matter shall be final.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/54/section/63

kiki,buying a tracked vehicle?,,,,you mean like a bulldozer or something? surely they weigh a lot more than a car and would chew up the tarmac?,lol

How long has the wall been up? if it is over 5 years they can get lost as consent is deemed but you need to show the council they are years out of time on this by some method. The dropped kerb is theirs though so they can refuse to allow it UNLESS you do certain things like knock your wall down. Petty, but there you are.

How long has the wall been up? if it is over 5 years they can get lost as consent is deemed but you need to show the council they are years out of time on this by some method.

It would be a condition of consent for the crossover, not the original consent for the wall.