how do you avoid this payment of chancel?

mrbadexample

Just out of interest, what happens if the people who are supposedly liable follow a different religion?

Hello Mr Muslim / Buddhist / Sikh / Whatever, would you like to pay for the upkeep of our church?

Coz I know what I'd be saying if the local Jehovah's Witnesses popped round asking for money for the upkeep of their Kingdom Hall, or whatever it is.....



N.B. All religions selected at random with no intent to cause offence. I'm an agnostic, me.

Incisor

dothemaths wrote: »

Incisor - sorry that's nonsense. How do you know that the Chancel needs reparing?

Uncommon Advice is right - its a rip off.

Not nonsense, it's you failing to comprehend, so no need to apologise

The accident is not that the chancel needs repairing, it is that you discover your property is liable for charges. Once that is discovered, you must pay as and when the vicar decides to repair the chancel.

You are insuring against being found to be liable, not against having to pay for repairs if you are liable.

Incisor

mrbadexample wrote: »

Just out of interest, what happens if the people who are supposedly liable follow a different religion?

Hello Mr Muslim / Buddhist / Sikh / Whatever, would you like to pay for the upkeep of our church?

Coz I know what I'd be saying if the local Jehovah's Witnesses popped round asking for money for the upkeep of their Kingdom Hall, or whatever it is.....

In theory it could happen. There would be nothing to stop them selling off land with a chancel liability to their hall.

mrbadexample

Incisor wrote: »

In theory it could happen. There would be nothing to stop them selling off land with a chancel liability to their hall.

And there's no get-out if your religion is different? Not exactly ideal, is it? I guess that's why it ends in 2013?

Incisor

mrbadexample wrote: »

And there's no get-out if your religion is different? Not exactly ideal, is it? I guess that's why it ends in 2013?

The get out is not to buy the property if it has a liability. The current problem is that some of these liabilities are so old that buyers don't know what they are taking on. And all that happens by 2013 is that the CoE will lose the opportunity to prove any more properties as being liable.

dothemaths

Incisor wrote: »

Not nonsense, it's you failing to comprehend, so no need to apologise

The accident is not that the chancel needs repairing, it is that you discover your property is liable for charges. Once that is discovered, you must pay as and when the vicar decides to repair the chancel.

You are insuring against being found to be liable, not against having to pay for repairs if you are liable.

You are not 'insuring against being found to be liable' - you know that from the results of the search! You are insuring against the cost of repairs being more than you can afford.

I go back to my original point. If a Chancel costs £100,000 to repair and there are 10,000 people liable - why take out insurance.

PS Sorry for apologising in my previous posting..........oh you were being ironic..right. Very good.

Incisor

dothemaths wrote: »

You are not 'insuring against being found to be liable' - you know that from the results of the search!

I said you wouldn't get a quote for that:

Incisor wrote: »

You can't get a quote because you already know there is a liability on the property.

dothemaths wrote: »

You are insuring against the cost of repairs being more than you can afford.

No. You buy a house without knowing if the church has the right to make chancel charges on it, and you insure against the risk of it subsequently being found liable. Once it is found liable, you cannot take out insurance against the charges. [Because the vicar could otherwise plan some works, get his liable parishoners to take out insurance and scam the insurance company out of the cost of works for any project]. The risk is not that the charges are too high, it is that you may discover a liability attaches to the property

I go back to my original point. If a Chancel costs £100,000 to repair and there are 10,000 people liable - why take out insurance.

Or if it costs £500,000 and only 25 people are liable? Don't for one moment imagine that this is an urban problem - it is is rural areas that this happens. But you shouldn't worry your head with this until you understand that once you know there is chancel liability it is too late to insure. The accident has happened and you are insuring against a certainty.

Looks like your premier ability is not comprehending.

boinging_2

havethis1 wrote: »

Theres not a chance in hell I would pay any money to a church.

Its time these medievil morons were shut down

Unfortunately there is no choice in the matter... The courts have spoken.

http://www.cofe.anglican.org/news/pcc_of_aston_cantlow_etc_v._wallbank.html

Doozergirl

Uncommon_Advice wrote: »

I wouldn't bother taking out a chancel indemnity policy. I think it is just a rip off that the sols use as a little income stream.

Solicitors don't make any money on the policies at all.

Doozergirl

dothemaths wrote: »

You are not 'insuring against being found to be liable' - you know that from the results of the search! You are insuring against the cost of repairs being more than you can afford.

I go back to my original point. If a Chancel costs £100,000 to repair and there are 10,000 people liable - why take out insurance.

The initial search costs the buyer about £6. It will highlight whether the property is in an area which may be affected. As I understand it, approximately one in three properties 'may' be affected.

Once you've been highlighted as a 'may be' you have the option of further searches to establish whether you actually are affected. The problem is that the information is not all in one place, hence this initial search being cheap and vague. If you have the full search carried out to find out whether you are actually definately affected, it costs quite a bit because of the lack of freely available information.

Once you have then been established as definately being affected, the risk to the insurer is increased - so you incur a much increased premium.

Chancelcheck have set themselves up very nicely, thank you, by placing the cost of their insurance product at less than thecost of a full search. By increasing the number of premiums, they can lower the cost of them and bring in more revenue.

Whilst this thing still exists, it's by far and above the best option for a buyer. As a vendor I would try to avoid paying it but it's not worth losing sleep over. There are several searches that you should or might have to carry out and indemnity policies that might have to be purchsed to satisfy lenders. It's another one which only really satisifes the buyer, hence I think buyer should probably pay. Policies are available to cover current and subsequent buyers so it's not endless. And it is optional although I bet that family near Stratford Upon Avon wish they'd bought it.

In the grand scheme it's easier to buy a policy and be covered than pay more to find out that you either can't be bothered to cover yourself or don't really want the house anymore and lose everything you've already spent in legals. You can't possibly know how much or how many are affected in a particular parish until it's too late - that's the point.