Property boundaries - potential dispute over side access

Mojisola

TrixA wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand how this can be the case as the house would not really be viable as a dwelling without the ability to run services along that wall. I'm sure there have been services running along that wall since the house was built - from memory there is at least one existing pipe running across it, a vent for the cooker and presumably pipes for washing machine etc . I can understand that we would not be allowed to excavate etc, but we would simply be running pipes along a wall that we own, or installing vents etc. What is the normal situation with end of terrace properties - how is it that this sort of thing doesn't arise all the time?

Based on the advice given above I've now located the freehold title for next door which names four freeholders and shows the boundary as including the passageway, no mention of any right of way

You may own the wall but you don't own the space on the other side of it.

kmmr

TrixA wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand how this can be the case as the house would not really be viable as a dwelling without the ability to run services along that wall. I'm sure there have been services running along that wall since the house was built - from memory there is at least one existing pipe running across it, a vent for the cooker and presumably pipes for washing machine etc . I can understand that we would not be allowed to excavate etc, but we would simply be running pipes along a wall that we own, or installing vents etc. What is the normal situation with end of terrace properties - how is it that this sort of thing doesn't arise all the time?

Based on the advice given above I've now located the freehold title for next door which names four freeholders and shows the boundary as including the passageway, no mention of any right of way

Just to reiterate mugwumps post - you almost certainly won't be able to add anything to that wall. I'd be prepared for a dispute about the stuff that is already there to be honest. The executors may have poked a hornets nest by even raising the issue.

Imagine if your garden wall was a party wall, and the other side installed an air conditioner where the exhaust and piping was on your side. You would complain I'm sure! This is the same principle. The wall is the boundary, and your rights stop at the edge of that wall.

It should be possible to run pipes in the house, it's just probably not convenient or cheap.

Good luck. London is crazy at the moment, but walk in with your eyes open as to what you can and can't do.

Gloomendoom

Mojisola wrote: »

You may own the wall but you don't own the space on the other side of it.

One of my relations has shutters covering a 1st floor window on the end wall of his house which looks out over their neighbour's drive. Their neighbour complained that when the shutters were opened or closed, his property was trespassed on. My relation and his wife are both lawyers and they took the issue to court to establish their right to open or close the shutters... and lost.

The shutters are fixed permanently open now.

AnnieO1234

You also get this a lot (installations encroaching onto neighbouring land) in respect of satellite installs. Give that a quick search even on MSE an you'll see why it's such a problem.

Can you ask the neighbours especially if anyone has lived on the street for a long time for their help in establishing what the situation was with the gate and passage?

Unfortunately OP you're clutching at straws with your argument that the house wouldn't be fit for purpose without access to that wall. It would, when it was built and just means you have to find a different route for supplies. You can access your garden through the house, the only major problem would be bin access if you have no store to front.

Fwiw if I were you I would establish the freeholder and if the passage doesn't benefit the flats seek to purchase it from them.

Xxx

G_M

TrixA wrote: »

W
I've now downloaded the LR titles and plans for two of the four neighbouring flats, including one belonging to one of the individuals who sent the response to the Executors' lawyer. I'm a complete novice, but they appear to show that the flats are leasehold - the boundaries shown relate only the individual flats and do not include the disputed passageway. In that case, how do I find out who actually owns that land? Will there be a separate title somewhere for the block of flats?

I refer you to my advice in post 8 above:

Depends who owns the freehold next door. The flat owners will each own a lease to their flats. The freehold may be owned by them all jointly, or may be owned by someone else entirely.

You need to download the freehold Title.

kmmr

G_M wrote: »

I refer you to my advice in post 8 above:


You need to download the freehold Title.

To be fair - it seems she has done so.

TrixA wrote: »

...

Based on the advice given above I've now located the freehold title for next door which names four freeholders and shows the boundary as including the passageway, no mention of any right of way

TrixA

I must be really naive because it had honestly never occurred to me that a situation like this could arise.

It seems that we need to establish the exact position of the boundary between the two properties. I'm not that bothered about being able to use the passage for access (although it would be nice, obviously) but I am hugely bothered at the idea that we would be restricted in making changes to the kitchen, which is really old and tired. I understand it may be possible to run pipes internally but I think that would be challenging with our budget.

The passageway is used by the flats to access their gardens so I don't imagine they would be prepared to sell it.

kmmr

The exact position is probably the wall. Even if you can somehow find a map that can be accurately measured, the normal guidance is that an existing feature 'on the ground' takes precedence over old plans.

ie - if it clear that a wall is intended as a boundary, and has been accepted as such for many years, then it is the boundary. Even if later you find that the wall was build a few inches (or feet) in the wrong place. People can get drawn into very long disputes about wrong placed boundary features on the belief that the plans are definitive, but even the LR says they are just guidance and you look to the features of the actual property for the final clarification.

(Apologies LR if that isn't quite right, but it is my interpretation!)

You could have a read of the gardenlaw website. They have sections on both boundary issues and ROW disputes.

TrixA

Having agonised over this for a couple of days and sought further advice from the lawyer, our feeling is that we are probably not willing to go ahead with the sale unless we can negotiate a significant price reduction.

Our rationale for the reduction would be threefold:
1) We were previously under the impression that the house had a right to access the side passage (a reasonable assumption given the presence of a gate giving access from the rear garden directly into the passage, and the fact that there are services attached to that wall). If the house has no rear access that's a significant loss of convenience and amenity. Given the pre-existing dispute with the neigbours and the need to get permission from four separate freeholders our assumption has to be that we would only ever be able to access the side of the property for essential maintenance, and if the neighbours are really difficult even that may require a court order.

2) We are planning essential modernisation works to the interior of the house which will be considerably more difficult and expensive than anticipated, given the likelihood that services will need to be routed internally. Again, this wasn't forseeable on viewing as the existing kitchen and bathroom have services routed via the external wall. The need for modernisation (specifically including a new kitchen) was noted when the house was marketed.

3) The potential for an unpleasant and protracted dispute with the neighbour and the uncertainty this creates, including the risk of a dispute over the existing gate and services on the wall in question (in his letter to the Executors' lawyers the neighbour requested that the gate be removed and made a veiled threat about damaging the existing pipework). We think this uncertainty reduces the value of the house, and also its potential resale value.

Do we have any chance? What level of reduction would be reasonable to go for in these circumstances? We were thinking of a number which would be about a 9% reduction on our current offer. The house in is London and we understand that there was some interest from other buyers, but not massive interest. We also know that prior to our offer being accepted there was another offer that fell through when the buyer tried to negotiate a 20% price reduction just prior to exchange. We don't know if that had anything to do with the neighbour dispute.

If we do want to renegotiate the price, can we do this through our lawyer or do we have to go back to the estate agents?

PasturesNew

Considering [1] [2] [3] I would come to the same conclusion.

Sometimes even a drop in price won't make up for that loss of satisfaction and joy.

To renegotiate you go through the EA, you advise your solicitor you're going for it - and it will also impact upon any mortgage application you've submitted as the figures/LTV have now changed, so double check your sums there too.... it's possible you could get the reduction and find yourself with a mortgage shortfall if the figures started off tight (although unlikely, but mortgage terms have changed in the last week or so).