Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
The owner of an award-winning wellness retreat has been ordered to pay a £90,000 court bill after it was seized. Bentley “Blocking” a GP’s car park during a bitter neighbor dispute.
Joey Jarvis, who runs Glasshouse Retreat, has been embroiled in a legal battle with Dr Reshma Rashid of Chapel Street Surgery in Billericay. essexOn the right of access to a narrow path.
This drive provides access to both Mrs Jarvis’s land and the surgery’s car park, which is used by staff and patients.
The shared access point became a flashpoint in a long-running feud, with lawyers saying Dr Rashid and his neighbors “have been attacking each other for years”.
Mrs Jarvis and her husband Brian acquired the land behind the surgery in 2021 for development, and a dispute arose over Dr Rashid’s right to use the drive.
Mrs Jarvis was accused of deploying her Bentley to “block” the car park, effectively “landlocking” it and rendering it unusable.
Mr and Mrs Jarvis claimed that Dr Rashid only had the right to use the front part of the lane and could not access her car park, the only reason being that he had extended his surgery too far to the rear, effectively blocking his own path.
but after a test Central London County CourtJudge Alan Johns dismissed Mr and Mrs Jarvis’ case and handed them a bill of £90,000 for the dispute so far.
The judge said Mrs Jarvis “regretted” the Bentley parking incident, but found that the 1973 vehicle and the fact it had been used by the surgery for more than 50 years proved Dr Rashid had the right of way across the entire driveway.
During the trial earlier this year, the court heard that Mrs Jarvis, 74, and her 71-year-old husband were experienced property developers, with Mrs Jarvis telling the judge she had been involved in property development for 40 years.
They are also the owners of the Glasshouse Retreat, a wellness spa where visitors are “invited to absorb themselves with holistic wellness…feel your body and mind reset, de-stress and relax…focus on what matters most while enjoying the retreat’s state-of-the-art facilities, Zen treatment rooms and nourishing meals.”
The retreat, which features a natural swimming pond, outdoor “wellness dome” and 21 rooms set in the Essex countryside, has won two TripAdvisor Travelers’ Choice Awards as well as other awards in the spa industry.
Dr Rashid, 62, bought the small family surgery in Chapel Street, Billericay, Essex, in 2006, having previously been made a GP partner there.
The warring sides first clashed in 2021 after Mr and Mrs Jarvis bought a former builders yard behind the house of Dr Rashid’s neighbours.
The yard, which the couple plan to develop as housing, is accessed from the main road via a driveway that Dr Rashid and predecessors have long used as access to the car park behind the surgery.
Their barrister, Rupert Myers, told the judge they owned the right of way behind the surgery under a 1973 conveyance and had used it for decades before Mr and Mrs Jarvis bought land next door.
“Almost immediately after acquiring the property, the defendants took issue with the claimant’s use of the road to access their car park,” he said.
“Soon after their purchase, the defendants and in particular the second defendant Mrs Jarvis claimed that the claimant had no right to use the entire length of the driveway to access the car park.
“On 24 August 2021, the second defendant parked his Bentley on the driveway in a manner that prevented the claimant and his patients from getting into or out of the surgery car park.
“This deliberate obstruction of the right of way caused significant disruption to the operation of the surgery.
“The road blockade by the second defendant completely prevented the claimant and his patients from exercising the right of way to the surgery.
“That interference was deliberate, it was done on the same day that the defendants’ counsel warned of clearing and fencing the land, indicating a deliberate attempt to deny access.”
He said the couple only “closed the barriers when facing legal action” and that they had “clearly stated their intention to fence” that part of the campaign, which he says Dr Rashid has no authority over.
“If this were done, the installation of such fencing would prevent the claimant and his invitees from accessing the car park by car, effectively grounding a significant part of the surgery premises,” he said.
“This is not a minor or technical violation.”
Dr Rasheed sued for a judicial declaration that his right over the driveway extended about 30 meters from the main road, ending at the gate to the old builders’ yard, allowing him and his patients and staff access to the car park.
However, Mr and Mrs Jarvis claimed that their rights of way over the driveway only extended 26 metres, which would not allow cars to access the car park.
His barrister, Kevin Leigh, told the judge the dispute had become fraught, adding: “These parties have been engaging in accusations against each other for a number of years.”
He said expert evidence showed the GP’s rights only extended to about 26 meters worth of driveway, which was enough for drivers to park cars before the surgery’s rear extension was built in 2018.
Before the extension work, visitors were able to drive down the lane and turn left into the car park without going beyond the 26-metre mark and going to the end of the lane, he said.
Returning to court to deliver his verdict, Judge Johns ruled in Dr Rashid’s favour, while noting that Mrs Jarvis “regrets” her actions in blocking the car park with her Bentley.
He said, “In my judgment, on the actual construction of the 1973 conveyance, the right of way extended to the entire length of the driveway, not just the first 26 metres.”
He said it was also important that there were no other features on the land other than the yard gate to mark the extent of the right of way.
He said, even if he was wrong, the use of the driveway as access to the car park for more than 50 years would give Dr Rashid the right to continue using it.
He added, “In fact the driveway was used for its entire, or almost its entire, length and no limit on the right of way was ever marked on the ground.”
“Use established the right of way by a long-term user. The user has probably been there since at least, or shortly thereafter, 1973 transportation.
“I am entirely satisfied that the historical user was sufficient to establish the right of way. This was and is a busy surgery and the driveway is the only means of access to its patient car park.”
Describing Mr and Mrs Jarvis as “total losers”, the judge ordered them to pay Dr Rashid’s lawyers’ bills for the case to date, amounting to £90,000 including VAT.
The judge rejected Mr and Mrs Jarvis’s claim for an injunction requiring them to remove drains and cables from beneath the driveway, saying there was “no reasonable basis” for the order.
The other allegations of trespass made by Mr and Mrs Jarvis against Dr Rashid remain unresolved and will return to court at a later date if not settled.