?10000 for a key

[lyledunn]

Licensed bar / restaurant had an agreed occupancy of 120 and was trading well. A FRA was undertaken and submitted in support of an entertainment licence. The assessor pointed out that the rear escape route ended in a small open yard that was under the ownership of others. A gate across the yard was locked in the evening. Rightly the assessor required the key to be made available and this was a condition of licence. Apparently no right of way was ever extended and the owners of the yard want ?10K for the gate key! Meanwhile, licence restricted to 60.

[kurnal]

To be fair its ?10k for a right of way not a key. Might well devalue the adjoining property by more than this and make it harder to sell? If it were your yard Lyle what would you ask?

[col10]

Valuation is another dark art.
The value is at least the amount needed to compensate for any detriment to the property giving the right of way, but the value could be a higher amount determined by assessing the max value to the bar / restaurant.
The MOE should not be key dependent.

[kurnal]

Another scenario arises when having previously granted aright of way, circumstances change and you, as owner of the land, want to cease it. That can prove impossible - or extremely expensive to buy it back. 

[Owain]

Less than ?1,000 a month to double the venue capacity. Sounds like a bargain to me.

If I were resident in a flat in that building and had control of the yard the key would not be available at any price if that meant I was kept awake at night by an entertainment venue.

Surely if the route is locked then it isn't an escape route and can't be signed as such?

[AnthonyB]

Another scenario arises when having previously granted aright of way, circumstances change and you, as owner of the land, want to cease it. That can prove impossible - or extremely expensive to buy it back. 

Which is why when drawing up a deed of easement it needs to cover all eventualities. I had a client who wanted to remove the usage of their premises from adjoining ones, they managed to dig up a copy of the rather old deed and fortunately it had a termination clause (with notice period) which could be used if the clients building was undergoing structural works or changes that resulted in them no longer wanting to grant the access - as it was being gutted to change from offices to flats the property lawyers were happy this triggered the clause and bye bye shared exit!

[Phoenix]

It may be a non-starter but they could look to see if they can reconfigure the internal layout so that the rear exit into the yard is no longer required.  Going across someone else's land should be avoided whenever possible.