scaffolding dispute

[Guest]

The bungalow next door to us has recently sold.* It came to light when the property was being marketed that although the previous owner had planning permission to create two rooms in the roof, the work was never signed off by the local council.* The new owners have applied for and been granted permission to now raise the roof by just over a metre, to remove the hip at the front and create a gable end and extend the roof over a new 4 metre extension to the rear.* We objected to this as it would seriously over shadow our home but the local council approved the proposals.* To add insult to injury we are now being asked to allow scaffolding on our drive to enable the work to be carried out.* We run a small business from home and have three vans on the drive which have tools in them and so it really is not appropriate to leave them on the road overnight.* I have just received a letter from their architects threatening Court action and quoting the Access to Neighbouring Land act 1992.* Does anyone have any idea of where we stand legally

[des8]

IMO the architects are trying it on*
The act they quote allows the court to make an access order:
"Where the court is satisfied ..... that it is reasonably necessary to carry out any basic preservation works to the dominant land, those works shall be taken for the purposes of this Act to be reasonably necessary for the preservation of the land; and in this subsection “basic preservation works” means any of the following, that is to say—

(a)the maintenance, repair or renewal of any part of a building or other structure comprised in, or situate on, the dominant land;

(b)the clearance, repair or renewal of any drain, sewer, pipe or cable so comprised or situate;

............................

but this subsection is without prejudice to the generality of the works which may, apart from it, be regarded by the court as reasonably necessary for the preservation of any land."

The proposed works do not IMO comply* as they are not for maintenance repair or renewal and cannot be classed as "basic preservation works"
*