Anyone know about shared access PATH only - no issue with actual access

[LAS123]

I have a weird situation re a shared access pathway across my front. It was previously a broken concrete path around some grass, neighbour has access across path to garden, no issue with this and they have never used the path anyway - but no issue if they did.
We have removed the path and grass and laid gravel all over. Neighbour now complaining about removal of broken path. Can this be pursued by them?

Can they still pass over the area?

If its shared did you discuss it with them first

Shared ownership or just right of access?

Who owns the path

Assuming you own the land and they don't have any mobility issues that make walking on the gravel an issue, it shouldn't be a problem.

We need a diagram

Is the path owned by you both or do they just have a right of access?
Can they still access their garden easily?

If you’re not preventing access and they can still go across the gravel I wouldn’t think it’s an issue. Why are they objecting if they never used the path? Do they believe the gravel prevents the access?

Thank you everyone so far, its owned by me, they have right of way across, not shared ownership.
Totally still accessible, not blocked in any way, its simply the surface that has been changed and all my grass removed so it appears more as one complete area with large stones to define the edge of the path.
Next door is LA property and tenant is awful, HO appears to be really supporting the tenant, previous history of complaints about rubbish and rat infestation which she didnt act on and resulted in environmental health involvement.

The path is still accessible. Ignore them.

I thunk this would depend on exactly what the deeds say

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

We need a diagram

We really don't. It's hardly difficult to imagine.

Totally still accessible, not blocked in any way, its simply the surface that has been changed and all my grass removed so it appears more as one complete area with large stones to define the edge of the path.

So, the path is still usable and clearly marked. Ignore them!

Double check your deeds to make sure you aren't restricted to solid paving or something though.

The right of way is still accessible, that is all that is required. I would respond that the broken path was a health and safety risk and you have done some maintenance on the area to improve usability. No access has been denied and a pathway still exists. The land remains your property and how that pathway is paved or surfaced is down to you there is no requirement for you to make it a continuous hard surface. As it is a right of way only there is also no need for the provision of disabled access which gravel might be tricky for (wheelchairs etc)

btw not a lawyer etc just have several RoW on my property

They are objecting in some kind of revenge for them receiving a written warning from EH re the storage of their rubbish, garden absolutely filled with rubbish, blocked drains with stagnant water etc, the EH also referred the children to safeguarding due to condition of the property, so this is in reaction to that I believe, they are physically unable to get to the path in question as they have had a hand rail installed from their front which blocks access to the path from their house anyway.
My concern is the H.O seems fully FULLY on board with supporting this ridiculous complaint, so so invested much more than she ever was with the rubbish/rats etc! She is ‘exploring with the legal team’ now. I have so far just responded with ‘path remains in situ and accessible’.

Thank you thats really helpful, I guess that is my question, I am right to assume I can replace a broken unsafe path with a covering of my choosing, as its my property? As long as access remains, which it does. It is wheelchair friendly but leads to 4 steps (their property).

The legal team will tell HO that it’s a non-starter. Don’t stress.

I have a similar property but still own the land, neighbours have right of access across but nothing is said about the surface. I'm sure it's changed over the 100 years the property has been there! Ignore💐

Thank you everyone! Feeling better now ( despite a deep bubbling rage at the c**t neighbour) the HO has taken quite a passive aggro/bitchy tone to her emails which I have not risen to as I plan to sell soon so dont want to start a war at this point! I shall check the deeds also, thank you.

But am official copy of your deeds, and next door's ( although if council there may not be one for just next door). If the current register refers to an older transfer in it, then get official copies of those too to see what they say.

They might specify a paved path. But I doubt it. There may be no roght of Access on them, and if there is a barrier preventing access then I'd fence it off ASAP.

I hate shared access stuff. Usually so poorly documented.

Don't focus on the current neighbour or the handrail. The HO is taking this up as it's their property and their right of way to protect so you need to address that concern rather than call your neighbour a 'c*unt'.

The HO have blocked there own access? Well that's a bit mad

Do you have pictures of how bad it was before?

Its ok ive only called them a c**t in my mind.
Checked deeds, all its says in reference to pathways is something along the lines of making proportionate payment to maintain, nothing about type of surface etc.

Yes the irony is the LA blocked their own access! The kids in the house can whip under the rail and get to the garden but the adults cant due to their size.
I have pictures of broken path, builder willing to provide a letter to support this, (tenant came out shouting at him to put it all back)
It seems that there is nothing specified anywhere that I can find about the type of surface. Hoping the legal team will indeed not pursue.