House about to go on the market: Dealing with Footpath and Kitchen issues

New2Forum

Our house is about to go on the market. We've lived here for over 20 years, but need to sell within 12 months, mainly because the mortgage is expiring in May 2016, and we think that it will be difficult (or impossible) to renew. There are other reasons we are ready for a move too.


Filling out the paperwork for the estate agent has given us some sleepless nights because we've suddenly realised that there are a couple of major issues that could prove a serious stumbling block.


1) There used to be a detached quadruple garage opposite the house. This was there long before we moved into the property - our best guess would be that they had been there since somewhere around the 1950s. In 2008 we converted the garages into a granny annexe (Its basically a detached 2 bedroom bungalow). We had planning permission and met buildings regulations. One clause in the planning permission was that a kitchen must not be installed. However, shortly after it was inhabited, a kitchen was installed (probably still in 2008). Obviously the kitchen shouldn't be there, but is now a major selling point for the property. Should we look towards retrospectictive planning permission (and risk being told to remove it?), look at indemnity insurance, or just bury our head in the sand and hope its not a major issue for any potential purchaser?


2) The second problem is that there is a public footpath that goes right through the middle of the property - presumably the footpath has been unusable for over 60 years since the garages were initially built. Should we look to get the footpath expunged? Rerouted? or again, bury our heads in the sand and hope its not a red line for a potential purchaser? With hindsight, how come the council gave us planning permission for the granny annexe when there is a footpath going through there? Do they have any liability for that?


For both issues we're concerned that if we try and tackle them, it won't be resolved by the time that people hopefully are interested in the property, and that pushes us more towards inaction.

phill99

Firstly, the council have no liability for givng you PP on the annexxe if there is a footpath running through it they are not interested in land ownership, easements etc. Don't try and blame them.

In terms of the kitchen, tje Planning Authority can't take enforcement action if the breach wasn't notified to them within four years from the date at which the breach occured. As it was early 7 years ago, enforcement action can't be taken against you. Remember this doesn't mean you have planning permission, it just means they can't make you take it out. A buyers solicitor will probably want indemnity insurance against this.

In terms of the footpath, getting it stopped or rerouted can be quite time consuming and expensive. I would be inclined to sell as is. It obviously didn't put you off so other buyers may well feel the same.

stator

If you can get an indemnity policy for those issues then it would be the easiest and probably cheapest option you have. Some buyers might still be put off.

New2Forum

Thanks both for your responses.


With regards to the kitchen - it was put in by the people living there at the time (a grown up foster child and her boyfriend) - so evidence that it was installed in 2008 doesn't exist - what kind of burden of proof would be required for the length of time it has been there? (it was a second hand discarded kitchen that they were given for free - visually there shouldn't be much doubt its been there for a while - proving it would be another matter altogether).

stator wrote: »

If you can get an indemnity policy for those issues then it would be the easiest and probably cheapest option you have. Some buyers might still be put off.

Should I look into the indemnity policy now, so it is in place if anyone queries the issues, or should I wait and see when it comes up? Presumably we are only talking about the indemnity policy in relation to the kitchen issue?


I think the footpath could be a major issue, and I don't think I would buy such a property now (though as I said, no-one has attempted to use it while we've been here, or probably for over 60 years - indeed it is impossible to use unless you start knocking the house down....)

phill99

So take the kitchen out. Leave it stacked up in the garage. Any prospective purchaser can make their own assumptions. Then no need for indemnity and no breach of planning.

Don't waste your money on indemnity until you ts asked for. It looks suspicious. Like you know loads of things are wrong

princeofpounds

The kitchen is not an issue. It's been there long enough that action against any breach of planning permission is not enforceable.


The footpath (assuming it is/was genuinely public) on the other hand is a major issue. If the ramblers decide they want to resurrect it, then you have a major problem on your hands. You should never have built over it. Theoretically you could be asked by a court to clear the footpath, though I would hope re-routing would be a more sensible compromise it could mean people being allowed to walk right up to your windows.

Tuscan

a neighbour had a similar issue with a kitchen, he had built a conservetory on the back of the kitchen then extended the kitchen units into it including an oven. When he came to sell he removed the units etc and then new owner put them straight back in again as it was a planning breach, i think mostly down to the oven....

eddddy

As others have suggested, the kitchen isn't really an issue. A cheap indemnity insurance policy would be enough to satisfy most buyers.

The footpath sounds like a much bigger problem. Enquiring with the council (and hence alerting them), is likely to open a very big can of worms.

Making an application to re-route the footpath (or even worse, stop it up) will draw attention to it. Some people are likely to object 'on principle' - and start using the footpath.

Similarly, a prospective buyer might innocently ask the council about the footpath - and so kick-off problems.

It might be worth taking specialist legal advice. The CLA (Country Land and Business Association, formerly The Country Landowners Association) have legal teams who would have expertise in this area. But they normally deal with farmers and large-scale landowners - I'm not sure if they would deal with an 'ordinary' home owner. http://www.cla.org.uk/

aap_2

What constitutes a kitchen? If you take out the oven and just have the sink and cupboards, does this still imply it as a kitchen?

anselld

Does the annex have a separate Council Tax valuation? Having or not having a kitchen may be more of an issue with valuation as a separate dwelling than it is with planning.

If does not currently have separate banding and the VOA decide it should do then they can backdate liability.

eddddy

.... I just remembered. Some mortgage lenders won't lend on a property with two kitchens (e.g. one in the house and one in the annex). They will be worried that the buyer intends to let out part of the property.

Usually it's enough to just remove the cooker in the second kitchen, and put in a washing machine (at least on the day the mortgage valuer visits) and call it a laundry room or utility room.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4582737