Jump to content

Damage to a Bridge


Gardian
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is on behalf of some friends who own a residence secondaire not far from us.

Their property is accessed from the main road by a small bridge which crosses a little stream. When I say a small bridge, I'm talking about a slab of concrete about 3m x 2m x 60cms thick: fine for cars or maybe a transit van to cross, but nothing much heavier. There are no weight restriction signs.

This 'bridge' also provides access to several other properties, with a track which passes along the northern boundary of our friend's property. From the deeds which they've sent me this morning to translate, the other owners have servitude to their properties over the bridge and along the track. This is not in dispute.

One of their neighbours, who have recently bought the house, are significantly extending the property and there have been heavy lorries crossing the bridge to deliver materials. Apparently the bridge has been quite badly damaged and will require repair or (probably) replacement.  Our friends have asked me for advice.

The section on servitude in their deeds says "Le proprietaire de la parcelle (the neighbours) fond dominant (what exactly does that mean?) pourra a toute heure et avec tout vehicule sur la parcelle (of our friends) fonds servant.  I take that to mean that his neighbour has access at any time of the day or night with any vehicle. This seems to me to be reasonable and well-intentioned, but probably wasn't intended to cover 20 tons of lorry!

Quite frankly, I think that our friends are on dodgy ground. No doubt that there are laws covering damage to someone else's property, but you start to get in to expensive and lengthy legalities. Instinctively, my advice is for them to try to come to some amicable agreement over recompense.

However, can anybody help with the 'letter of the law' over damage in a situation like this?  Any ideas much appreciated. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fond dominant

Means that property of the neighbour enjoys the benefit of the servitude, your friends property bears the burden of the servitude.

You will have to check the jurisprudence from previous judgments (without two "e"s ), however there are a number of cases containing comparable jurisprudence where farmers have with the increasing size of farm machinery and equipment obtained favourable judgments allowing the passage of larger and presumably heavier equipment.

Let us know how the cookie crumbles!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="pachapapa"]

fond dominant

Means that property of the neighbour enjoys the benefit of the servitude, your friends property bears the burden of the servitude.

[/quote]

That's excellent PPP & crucial in this problem.  Thank you very much.

I've just finished a long telephone chat with my pal. He agrees that entering in to litigation would be madness and that he really should have had a warning weight limit sign up by the bridge and to have had a chat with his neighbour before building work started.

I think that it's just one of the many problems of not being 'on the spot' and having very limited command of French.

He's now going to put up a sign (bolting the stable door somewhat, I told him) and go round to see his neighbour with the quote for repair / rebuilding of the bridge, hoping for an offer of some contribution. I said that I reckoned that he'd get the French equivalent of a V sign and he's pretty resigned to that. The repairs will cost him (at a guess) €500-€1000 and a replacement at least twice that. Best put down to experience.

BTW, the building work has apparently taken out another neighbour's phone line, so this guy is not flavour of the month locally! 

Sorry, don't know the answer to your question re the servitudes.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a thought ... if this is a residence secondaire presumably it won't be used by your friend in the winter but will be by the neighbours ? Could he just say he can repair the bridge now if they make a contribution but it will have to wait till next summer if they don't ? Who is liable if a heavy lorry falls through it ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="pachapapa"]

Small point as to the history of the servitude.

Is it a servitude légale or a servitude conventionelle?

[/quote]For those of us not so learned in the law, can you explain the difference between these two types of servitude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rabbie"][quote user="pachapapa"]

 

Small point as to the history of the servitude.

Is it a servitude légale or a servitude conventionelle?

[/quote]For those of us not so learned in the law, can you explain the difference between these two types of servitude[/quote]

A legal "servitude de passage" is created due to a property being a "enclave" with requirement to access the public highway; one of the several legal servitudes contemplated in the Civil Code.

A conventional "sevitude de passage" is created by a convention by two or more parties, the servitude attaches to property and is not a personal right.

Both contemplate the payment of an indemnity for the use of the servitude in respect of maintenance and inconvenience caused.

The width of a "private right of way" is often taken as being 3.50 metres in width and unhindered access for "security vehicles" is mentioned.

Inconvenient if your neighbour's house burns down because the fire engine cant get near it.[:)] 

The chances are that there are no formal agreements, several neighbours using the access, as to the repair, upkeep and maintenance of the way.

So in principle the sharing of costs would be dependant on the particular benefit obtained by the users in proportion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="greyman"]Just a thought ... if this is a residence secondaire presumably it won't be used by your friend in the winter but will be by the neighbours ? Could he just say he can repair the bridge now if they make a contribution but it will have to wait till next summer if they don't ? Who is liable if a heavy lorry falls through it ?[/quote]

That's a very good suggestion Greyman - I've taken the liberty of copying & pasting that in an email to my friend.  Thanks.

It has the beauty of putting the boot on the other foot, i.e. even if they are aware of our friends' liability for maintenance, they'd have to enter in to litigation to enforce it. Much more costly than making a few hundred euros contribution to repairs.

The bridge is now quite dodgy apparently: cracks all over it and water + freezing in the winter will be bad news. The stream can become quite a torrent when it rains, so ............

As to liability, I suspect it would be the owner, i.e. our friends

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having been placed in a similar position, and as it sounds like your friend could be liable, I would suggest in addition he approaches his insurance company and finds out if they are actually offering cover for this bridge.

We replaced an old timber construction but the insurance company insisted on an engineers report giving safe working loads before we could erect any weight limit signage. 'Neighbours' requiring access also needed to be informed by registered letter of the weight limits.

This happened many years ago but even then it was a large hurdle to get over before we could get rid of the property. So much for picture postcard water mills!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="pachapapa"]

Let us know how the cookie crumbles!

[/quote]

An update.

My pal decided to take the bull by the horns and take some direct action. Yesterday, another well-laden turned up and was over the bridge before he could stop it.  So he did no more than close the gates and fit a hefty chain and padlock, thus imprisoning the lorry!

Site foreman went mad, but they were left to fume for an hour or so before being 'released'. Neighbours came round that evening, apparently with a metaphoric olive branch. Everything was settled over a few glasses of wine - an acceptance that they hadn't thought through the problem and that the servitude wasn't meant to cover heavy vehicules. Furthermore, the news that they'd agreed an alternative access route for the lorries via another neighbour's property. The neighbours seemed surprised that the Brits understood enough French to have interpreted their deeds accurately.

So, peace has broken out. My pal had to break off our conversation because France Telecom had just arrived to fix the phone line to a 3rd neighbour which had been ruptured by the building work, so I wasn't able to ask what was going to happen about the repairs.

Moral of the story - a bit of direct action + wine works wonders!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Gardian"]

Moral of the story - a bit of direct action + wine works wonders!

[/quote]What a result!  These kinds of disputes are discussed a lot here and it's suprising how often there's an apparent reason for not just talking to the other party face to face, at least as a first attempt.  Pity because, clearly, it can work.[:)]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...