We are regularly instructed by clients in relation to disputes over land and parking rights. With ever more people using a car as their sole means of transportation disputes over where these cars are parked can quickly escalate especially if a neighbour believes that they have a right to park on land that belongs to someone else. Clients have also come to us when a neighbour has blocked an accessway with their vehicle which means that the clients now need to manoeuvre around their neighbour’s car. These disputes can often become heated as the parties to a dispute often live within a close proximity of one another.

It is important to keep the issues in perspective and if a neighbour frequently blocks access to your drive, they may be under the mistaken impression that they have a legal right to park. We can check this on your behalf by referring to the land registry documents and, where necessary, the title deeds.

Often a client has tried to reason with their neighbour but to no avail and seek legal advice as a last resort. Usually when we are instructed we will analyse the documents that are provided to advise a client on their legal rights. We offer a fixed fee for a review of the title deeds and the land registry documents and to let you know the advisable next steps.

After providing the advice we will establish whether a letter should be sent to your neighbour putting forward details of the infringement and letting your neighbour know that there is a dispute. In some cases, this will be the end of the matter but there have been times when a neighbour refuses to back down and in these cases, we encourage clients to use alternative dispute resolution to bring an end to a dispute. This can include the use of roundtable meetings or mediation.

If alternative dispute resolution is not successful or your neighbour fails to engage in the process we will discuss with you whether your case should be issued in court and provide an estimate of costs at that stage.

If court proceedings are already underway with your neighbour, we will provide you with urgent advice and let you know how to best proceed.

Summerfield Browne have offices in Leicester, Birmingham, London, Oxford, Cambridge and Market Harborough.

Summerfield Browne Solicitors acted on a litigation dispute for a client against B&Q relating to the fitting of a new bathroom in our client’s property by B&Q.

The litigation claim was successfully resolved by Summerfield Browne to the satisfaction and delight of our client

If you have any similar issues that need resolving then our team can guide you through the process.

Summerfield Browne have offices in Leicester, Birmingham, London, Oxford, Cambridge and Market Harborough.

Do you have a CCJ that you need to set aside?

Our case study below regarding a recent claim shows the way that we can assist with your dispute.

We successfully acted for a client in a successful dispute resolution to set aside a CCJ by consent. Jewson withdrew the claim and there was no liability for costs for our client.

Summerfield Browne have offices in Leicester, Birmingham, London, Oxford, Cambridge and Market Harborough.

There have been numerous cases reported in the press relating to Business Rates disputes with RVA Surveyors (these are not our cases):

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/scam-business-rates-company-rva-12545285

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/notorious-business-rates-firm-rva-12345276

We have been contacted by several businesses encountering problems and we have a team of experts who are able to help. Our case study below regarding a recent claim provides an insight into the way that we can assist with your dispute.

Summerfield Browne Solicitors advised a client regarding a Business Rates Dispute with RVA Surveyors. The matter was to be heard on the fast track and as such had cost implications for both parties. However our Laura Everson advised on and resolved the Business Rate Litigation to the great satisfaction and happiness of our client.

Summerfield Browne have offices in Leicester, Birmingham, London, Oxford, Cambridge and Market Harborough.

A group of Hermes couriers have won their fight to be treated as workers instead of independent contractors in what was described as one of the most significant victories against exploitation of gig-economy workers.

The couriers were incorrectly classified as self- employed and were entitled to receive the minimum wage and holiday pay, and to reclaim unlawful deductions from their wages.

Read the full article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/25/hermes-couriers-are-workers-not-self-employed-tribunal-rules

Addison Lee is another company which faced defeat in court over its treatment of workers as ‘independent contractors’ without rights to holiday pay or the national minimum wage.

Read the full article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/02/addison-lee-suffers-latest-defeat-in-legal-row-over-gig-economy-rights

Another interesting case is concerning Uber. The Tribunal ruled in 2016 that Uber drivers should be treated as employed workers with rights to minimum wage and sick pay. However, Uber were granted the right to appeal but lost its appeal against a ruling that its drivers should be classed as workers with minimum-wage rights.

Read the full article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/10/uber-loses-appeal-employment-rights-workers

Similar verdicts were reached in cases brought against Uber, City Sprint, Excel and eCourier.

So, what is the difference?

A person is generally classed as a ‘worker’ if:

• They have a contract or other arrangement to do work or services personally for a reward (your contract doesn’t have to be written);

• Their reward is for money or a benefit in kind, for example the promise of a contract or future work;

• They only have a limited right to send someone else to do the work (subcontract);

• They have to turn up for work even if they don’t want to;

• Their employer has to have work for them to do as long as the contract or arrangement lasts;

• They aren’t doing work as part of their own limited company in an arrangement where the ‘employer’ is actually a customer or client.

Workers are entitled to certain employment rights.

An independent contractor is a self-employed person who provides certain services to a second-party called the principal, or to a third -party on behalf of the client. An independent contractor is not under the control, guidance, or influence of the client, and unlike an employee, does not owe a fiduciary duty.

Why Summerfield Browne?

Summerfield Browne Solicitors will aim to reach a final settlement, that will give you and your family, the compensation you need and deserve. Our team of specialist lawyers will robustly negotiate on your behalf, and endeavour to obtain the best settlement for you as soon as possible.