Shared driveway

[spunkydog]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NC
I have an easement to access my garage and carport. My neighbor has no where to park except on his side of the shared driveway, therefore, my side is used for ALL cars coming in and going out. There is no other access to either house. My easement has been used so much that it is now in terrible condition and needs repaved. It does not seem quite right that I should have to pay for 1/2 the costs of repaving since the wear and tear is caused because they park on the driveway.

[154NH773]

Sounds pretty fair to me.
What does the easement say as to sharing of maintenance costs? If it says nothing, then you're lucky he will agree to paying anything. You both use the easement to access your properties... you both should pay equally.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by 154NH773

Sounds pretty fair to me.
What does the easement say as to sharing of maintenance costs? If it says nothing, then you're lucky he will agree to paying anything. You both use the easement to access your properties... you both should pay equally.

So, it sounds fair that, if the neighbor drives a semi and the OP rides a bicycle, the OP should need to pay 50/50 for the maintenace?

[154NH773]

So, it sounds fair that, if the neighbor drives a semi and the OP rides a bicycle, the OP should need to pay 50/50 for the maintenace

With all due respect, both parties have the right and ability to drive a tank on the right-of-way. What they are doing today doesn't restrict what they may do tomorrow.
Although it isn't clear from the post what the OP's use actually is compared to the neighbor, his use seems to be the same, ingress and egress; therefore, in my opinion the cost should be shared equally. If you have some legal reason why it should not be, I'd be interested in hearing it.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by 154NH773

With all due respect, both parties have the right and ability to drive a tank on the right-of-way. What they are doing today doesn't restrict what they may do tomorrow.
Although it isn't clear from the post what the OP's use actually is compared to the neighbor, his use seems to be the same, ingress and egress; therefore, in my opinion the cost should be shared equally. If you have some legal reason why it should not be, I'd be interested in hearing it.

What is the legal basis for even sharing the cost?

[drewguy]

Yes. Suppose one neighbor had 5 cars and the other 1. Should they then share 5/6 and 1/6? What if one of them is a housewife who comes and goes much of the day, while the other has only a "creampuff" that comes out on Sunday?

You can spin it out a number of ways, but what it comes back to is that a split (1/x) is likely to be fairest and simplest for the vast majority of cases.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by drewguy

Yes. Suppose one neighbor had 5 cars and the other 1. Should they then share 5/6 and 1/6? What if one of them is a housewife who comes and goes much of the day, while the other has only a "creampuff" that comes out on Sunday?

You can spin it out a number of ways, but what it comes back to is that a split (1/x) is likely to be fairest and simplest for the vast majority of cases.

What is the LEGAL basis, in THIS case, for sharing the cost?

[drewguy]

Originally Posted by Zigner

What is the LEGAL basis, in THIS case, for sharing the cost?

1) An agreement
2) If no agreement, the common law of many states regarding shared access easements.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by drewguy

1) An agreement

No mention has been made by THIS OP.

2) If no agreement, the common law of many states regarding shared access easements.

Post the relevant law for NC (not saying it's not there - just saying that YOU brought it up, so you should cite it )

[154NH773]

Zigner is technically correct, as I also said earlier.

What does the easement say as to sharing of maintenance costs? If it says nothing, then you're lucky he will agree to paying anything.

However; if the issue went to court it could go any way. Usually a court will use the rule of reasonableness, but I wouldn't trust the court to make the decision. The court could find that the OP has to pay for everything.
So... as a reasonable person, I think the cost should be split 50/50; and my opinion, I believe, is as close to a legal opinion as can be obtained without knowing more about the particulars of the situation. My opinion, naturally, is irrelevant as only a court can actually decide.