Chancel Liability Search

donna1975

We are doing a part x with wimpey and we had an email from our solicitor today saying "the search has confirmed a possible liability somewhere in the parish and they want an insurance policy to cover any new buyer should they ever be approached by the church for repairs to be done. The policy costs £80.00. Please let me know your thoughts in respect of this."

Is it normal that we the seller pay for the policy? surely the buyer should pay for it, why would i want to pay an insurance policy for something I wont gain from. also once we sell the house wimpey become the owner and then the insurance policy would be valid as it will be in our name and then wimpey will be selling the house on to someone else after that.

This house selling is a confusing buisness.

Richard_Webster

Normally if there is anything adverse shown up when you sell you have to sort it out. Because the government made a half-hearted attempt to change the law we are stuck with this as another thing solicitors have to look into. So it might not have been an issue when you bought - but goal posts change every so often and sellers get stuck with the problem. So really you should pay.

What happens in practice is that because the solicitor offers you no further explanation, for one reason or the other you think it is a cheek, and you say "No". Buyer often then does get stuck with the cost.

There are loads of threads about Chancel Repairs etc if you want to know more about the background to this.

donna1975

I dont actually want to pay either as wimpey have already knocked 20k off our asking price so I think they could actually pay it, also as controversial as this maybe i dont actually believe in god so i dont really think I should have to fork out for an insurnace for something im not going to benefit from. but if its going to hold up the sale in any way then we'll just pay it.

Richard_Webster

I do believe in God, and apart from the hassle it causes me a conveyancing solicitor, my other reason reason for wanting to see the whole thing abolished is the appallingly negative image it conveys of the Church.

The Church should mainly be about God's relationship with people anyway, so old buildings with expensive chancels are pretty irrelevant to this. People who like old buildings should pay for them if they want to keep them going.

Having had a rant, if Wimpey are involved then they will want you to pay and will probably dig their heels in - but obviously be careful you are not paying more than you should for the new house you are buying from them.

iolanthe07

The church is embarrassed about this and would like to see it abolished. The problem is that English Heritage insist on a charge being imposed if there is a liability before they will make a grant, and also under charity law the churchwardens are required to pursue any liability. In practice it is very rare indeed that there is a liability, but because of one notorious case a few years ago insurance companies and solicitors have jumped on the bandwagon. IIRC any potential liability will not be enforceable after 2012.

donna1975

I dont really know anything about it much, but I just dont really want to pay for anything i'm not going to benefit from.

I think we have got good deal with wimpey, although they have knocked 20k off our asking price, we have got them down to 245 500 after it being on sale in jan for 300k and at this time in the market no one was showing an interest in our house so part x seems to be the only option.

Incisor

donna1975 wrote: »

I dont really know anything about it much, but I just dont really want to pay for anything i'm not going to benefit from.

You are selling a house together with the millstone of possible chancel liability to go around the neck of any buyer. That millstone is around your neck at the moment and you want someone else to take it on. If the liability is called in, it is unlikely but it could exceed the value of the house. Understandably, buyers are cautious.

The benefit to you is that someone else will buy the house.

donna1975

Incisor wrote: »

You are selling a house together .

We are not selling it together, wimpey are buying off us, they then are selling it on. So to us its the same as if someone else was buying it, I would not expect someone i was buying a house off to pay for an insurance for me, but as I understand this is all quite normal so we will go with the norm and just pay it.

Incisor

donna1975 wrote: »

We are not selling it together, wimpey are buying off us, they then are selling it on. So to us its the same as if someone else was buying it, I would not expect someone i was buying a house off to pay for an insurance for me, but as I understand this is all quite normal so we will go with the norm and just pay it.

I said you are selling a house together with a millstone. If that doesn't work for you, then try you are selling a house accompanied by a millstone then.

donna1975

ahh I see, should read it properly

Bogof_Babe

I can understand Donna's confusion as surely an insurance company only pays out to the insured. If Donna is the insured and the new owners fall liable for chancel repairs then this is no longer anything to do with her.