Bankers, the art dealers and a six-figure court row over a foot of parking space
A BANKER couple, a company boss and a doctor, living side by side in million-pound homes... it all sounds very genteel.
But this cast of professionals are locked in a ‘trivial’ legal battle over just a foot of parking space.
The dispute, in affluent Hampstead, North London, has rumbled on for years. But it has now reached court, with those involved racking up six-figure lawyers’ fees.
Bankers Andrew McSpadden, 47, and his wife Penny, 49, have long been at war with finance company boss Sheriar Bradbury, 54, over the width of spaces outside their homes in a converted church.
The row escalated after Dr Sophie Hanina’s art- dealer parents bought her the third house in
‘Trivial and pointless dispute’
the three-home development for £1.45million in 2013.
Mary Hanina, 70, said her 33year-old daughter’s middle parking space is virtually unusable, and that only a ‘ professional driver’ would be able to squeeze a car between Mr Bradbury’s convertible BMW and the McSpaddens’ 4x4 Volvo.
The McSpaddens insist each house has a right to a 6ft 10in wide space and that they are using theirs correctly. They claim Mr Bradbury is taking up more space than he should and both sets of neighbours often box their car in.
But the Haninas and Mr Bradbury both say the parking area should be divided so that each house gets a 7ft 10in space. In her evidence, Mrs Hanina said the ‘tragedy’ of the row was that there is enough space to accommodate slots of that size.
Meanwhile Mr Bradbury says the dispute is a waste of time and would be solved if everybody simply parked a few inches along.
His barrister, Gary Cowen, said: ‘He considers this to be an especially trivial and pointless dispute, given there is an obvious means of accommodating each party.’
Central London County Court heard that when first converted from an old Presbyterian church in the 1970s, the deeds to the houses included three car parking spaces in front. At the time, the area had walls on two sides, but one – beside the McSpaddens’ space – was later demolished.
The McSpaddens insist the area for parking spaces is between the inside of the original walls, giving each house a 6ft 10in spot.
But the Haninas and Mr Bradbury say the width of the original walls should be included, making each space a foot wider.
The Haninas’ barrister, Sebastian Kokelaar, said of the doctor’s spot: ‘It would just about be possible for professional drivers to park, but they would have great difficulty getting out of the car.
‘It is simply not possible for three modern vehicles to be parked conveniently in the space the McSpaddens say was allocated.’
He claimed the McSpaddens have trespassed on Dr Hanina’s space while parking their car, adding: ‘It is physically impossible to use it when there is also a car parked in Mr Bradbury’s space.
‘Even when there isn’t, it is not possible to use the space lawfully because this would inevitably result in a trespass on his land.’
Mr McSpadden said there was no problem until 2009, when cars parked in Mr Bradbury’s space began to encroach on the middle spot. The banker said: ‘ The approach to parking came to be: take what you can get, what is convenient to you.’
But Mr Bradbury’s barrister, Gary Cowen, denied he is using more space than he is entitled to.
He told Judge Nicholas Parfitt: ‘He does not accept that what was conveyed was only 6ft 10in.’
The court heard the parties are also at loggerheads over the use of a bin storage area, which the McSpaddens insist is theirs alone.
Dr Hanina and Mr Bradbury say it is the only bin store on the development and it must have been intended that they are able to use it too. The hearing continues.