Neighbouring house 'overlaps' LR boundary?

DRP

Some advice please.

A terraced house we have viewed has a conservatory at rear that almost sits on the left hand boundary. On the left hand wall (within the conserv) is a cupboard that only runs about half the depth of the conserv - the other halfish is not accessible and according to the vendor 'belongs' to the neighbour (presumably it is a room/cupboard accessible from the neighbours side.)

The original land registry plan (left hand side of my picture below) shows this combined area as a 'spur' from the back of the property - the right hand side of the picture is my mock-up of how the property currently looks with the conserv at the back and the split halves of the 'spur' accessible from each side



I am going to talk to the EA/vendor about it , but my questions are

1) how reliable are the LR plans?
2) does this look like some kind of botch that we will run into problems with ?
3) What specific questions should we ask?
4) what does the dotted line (arrowed) mean? The garden had a low fence and gate at that point, but EA stated that all is owned by the vendor

The property hasn't been sold in the last dozen years or so and the current owners built the conservatory.

Thanks for any comments.

Land_Registry

The Land Registry title plan shows the 'general boundaries' of the property only - have a read of our Public Guide 9 for a wider understanding of our title plans and boundaries

It is always important to appreciate that the title plan is base don the Ordnance Survey detail stored at the time that the plan was first created. The title plan should have a ring stamp and a date within that stamp. That date represents the month/year of mapping by Land Registry and would give you an idea of how old the OS detail is.

The key to remember is that the plan will not alter as and when boundaries or buildings are changed as it's purpose is to show the general boundaries of the property/title and not what is built or extended within those boundaries. I would not expect therefore to see any change to the black OS lines unless OS had re-surveyed, which is very unlikely unless the whole area is redeveloped AND the title had been re-mapped for some reason - an extension for example would not trigger either a new survey or a re-mapping.

As far as specific questions are concerned the main issue is whether the conservatory is within the general boundaries. If a small part overlaps the boundary as you suggest if it is merely a foot or two then it would not show up on any plan anyway. Questions would probably then revolve around whether planning regs had been followed and whether the quality of build were sufficient as well as what agreements/arrangements exist with the neighbour and have they been formalised in some way?

The dotted line (arrowed) could be one of two things.
It could simply be the marking used by Land Registry when mapping the title, namely a plot line to enable the mapper to then add the red line in the right place. This is a pre-computer plan and as such the plot line and then red line would have been added by hand.

However if there used to be a low fence and gate it could be an OS detail added when the area was originally surveyed. OS will map features which are less than a foot in height with a pecked (dotted) line whilst higher features are shown by a solid line.

The fact there was a gate included might suggest the fence was higher than a foot and therefore it seems likely that it was a plot line added by Land Registry to aid the mapping process at the time.

You mention that it is all owned by the Vendor - if by that you mean the land beyond this dotted line and back to Number 17 as shown then there is presumably another title and therefore plan for that part of the property?

Hope this helps

DRP

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

The Land Registry title plan shows the 'general boundaries' of the property only - have a read of our Public Guide 9 for a wider understanding of our title plans and boundaries

It is always important to appreciate that the title plan is base don the Ordnance Survey detail stored at the time that the plan was first created. The title plan should have a ring stamp and a date within that stamp. That date represents the month/year of mapping by Land Registry and would give you an idea of how old the OS detail is.

The key to remember is that the plan will not alter as and when boundaries or buildings are changed as it's purpose is to show the general boundaries of the property/title and not what is built or extended within those boundaries. I would not expect therefore to see any change to the black OS lines unless OS had re-surveyed, which is very unlikely unless the whole area is redeveloped AND the title had been re-mapped for some reason - an extension for example would not trigger either a new survey or a re-mapping.

As far as specific questions are concerned the main issue is whether the conservatory is within the general boundaries. If a small part overlaps the boundary as you suggest if it is merely a foot or two then it would not show up on any plan anyway. Questions would probably then revolve around whether planning regs had been followed and whether the quality of build were sufficient as well as what agreements/arrangements exist with the neighbour and have they been formalised in some way?

The dotted line (arrowed) could be one of two things.
It could simply be the marking used by Land Registry when mapping the title, namely a plot line to enable the mapper to then add the red line in the right place. This is a pre-computer plan and as such the plot line and then red line would have been added by hand.

However if there used to be a low fence and gate it could be an OS detail added when the area was originally surveyed. OS will map features which are less than a foot in height with a pecked (dotted) line whilst higher features are shown by a solid line.

The fact there was a gate included might suggest the fence was higher than a foot and therefore it seems likely that it was a plot line added by Land Registry to aid the mapping process at the time.

You mention that it is all owned by the Vendor - if by that you mean the land beyond this dotted line and back to Number 17 as shown then there is presumably another title and therefore plan for that part of the property?

Hope this helps

Hi - thanks for your input!

The area behind the dotted line (not edged in red) is currently used by the vendor and was described by the EA as part of the property.

How do I identify the title that refers to that part of the garden? I have searched on the land reg website and there is only one register and one plan.

Does that imply that the vendors do not in fact own that part of the land?

Land_Registry

Have you used the Map enquiry function on the website at all? - use the postal address to locate the property and then the aerial image to zero in on the land to the rear.

If the system advises information as being available then you should be able to view the register/plan and see if it is registered.

You mention that the property has been in the same ownership for a number of years so they may have acquired ownership over that time but as the title plan shows clearly defined OS boundaries (the black solid lines) it is possible that it is registered under a separate title number but in their name(s) already?

Try online and let me know how far you get

If no information is available online then I would go back to the EA and tell them the registered extent stops at X and Y does not appear to be registered - they may be able to advise as to the circumstances but may not be aware as this would be something the solicitor would check on etc

DRP

Thanks again!

I used the radius search option on the map. The area behind the dotted line is described as 'land adjoining' no17 (ie. the property the other side of the part of the garden in question) and belongs to the vendors.

The charge register contains:

(DATE) A Transfer of the land in this title dated DATE
made between 'OWNERS OF #17' and 'PREVIOUS OWNERS #12?' contains the following covenants:-
"2. FOR the benefit and protection of the Transferor's adjoining property known as #17 aforesaid and each and every part thereof the Transferees for themselves and their successors in title of the property hereby transferred and other the owners and occupiers for the time being thereof and each and every part thereof hereby jointly and severally covenants with the Transferor and her successors in title at all times hereafter to perform and observe the covenants hereto
(a) Not to use the property hereby conveyed except as a garden and/or orchard
(b) Not to do or permit to be done on the property hereby conveyed or any part thereof anything which may be or become a nuisance or annoyance to the Vendor or other the owners and occupiers for the time being of the said adjoining property
(c) Not to build or erect or permit to be built or erected on the
property hereby conveyed or on any part thereof any building or buildings (except garden sheds or greenhouses)
(d) To trim and keep trimmed from time to time the Transferees' side of the hedge forming the common boundary between the property hereby conveyed and the Transferor's said adjoining property."

To me i sounds like the ownership/transfer is legit and the charge register is written in order to prevent development of the land beyond maintenance and garden use. Is this correct?

Land_Registry

Seems like a good interpretation - the land was bought separately and no harm in having the whole property under 2 titles. Just means the solicitors need to type a few more characters

DaftyDuck

On the other matter, near the house. That split half with the conservatory is quite common, especially in Victorian properties, or thereabouts. It's from the remnants of the outside loo... one building, divided into two, doorways onto each property, boundary wall horizontal.

Privy block gets knocked down, leaving the "wiggle" of the original two loos, lost track with time ... { second time he's cropped up in two posts! }

No idea about boundaries and that kind of legal stuff. That's beyond my pay-grade!

DRP

DaftyDuck wrote: »

On the other matter, near the house. That split half with the conservatory is quite common, especially in Victorian properties, or thereabouts. It's from the remnants of the outside loo... one building, divided into two, doorways onto each property, boundary wall horizontal.

Privy block gets knocked down, leaving the "wiggle" of the original two loos, lost track with time ... { second time he's cropped up in two posts! }

No idea about boundaries and that kind of legal stuff. That's beyond my pay-grade!

great call, dafty - i hadn#t considered outside toilets. When we go back to view again i'll check it out.

IN fact the vendors' cupboard had a washing machine in it, so obviously plumbed etc

DaftyDuck

Just out of interest, I rent one out in Cambridge like that. Having bought mine fairly recently, I had to have a water meter fitted. The neighbouring (friendly) property doesn't have a meter, as the delightful elderly lady has lived there for over sixty years. Obviously, the garden tap is supplied from the old loo block. Interestingly, it is supplied from the neighbouring water supply, so is unmetered. I haven't (yet) got round to correcting that "defect"