Even if you share the same private road, a homeowner’s explicit refusal is not permission to approve construction and demand money from them afterward. If residents are expected to divide the cost of paving, they should first receive an estimated price and an opportunity to agree to the work.
A Minnesota homeowner learned that their neighbor apparently followed a very different process. About a year earlier, the neighbor proposed paving the upper half of their private dirt road to reduce the dust created by passing vehicles. The homeowner said no. He had recently purchased his house, and eliminating the dust wasn’t a priority, considering his household budget. Besides, the existing road remained in good condition with no potholes.
The homeowner believed the plan had been abandoned… Until he left home one day and discovered a construction company preparing to spread chipped asphalt. Nobody had warned him that the work was moving forward. All the same, he was asked for his “share” of the cost. But the homeowner hadn’t even seen the construction invoice. He didn’t even know how much money was being demanded. If there’s nothing in the deed, then this homeowner shouldn’t have to pay for work he didn’t approve.
In fact, the neighbor was the one who wanted a paved road. Despite the homeowner’s “no”, he proceeded, and now he demands payment? No way. Before the homeowner hands over anything, the neighbor should at minimum produce the invoice, explain the agreement they believe applies, and demonstrate why someone who never approved the project supposedly owes a share. What’s more, a person who independently commissions a project assumes the risk that others can refuse to finance it. So the neighbor is the one responsible for this, and also the people who may have agreed to the project.
Author: Kayitsi.com
