Right of way amendment - advice please

ratechaser

OK, I don't typically comment on this part of the board, but I have to say that this sounds more and more insane with every new bit of information. So your prospective new neighbours don't like the thought of you being in your own garden because it might be an invasion of their privacy. And they think that the perfect solution to this is through restricting your existing right of way...?

All well and good wanting to be pragmatic, but they sound far from reasonable for even asking that question. They're chancing their arm to get something that would increase the value of their property and decrease yours.

My answer would be, "sorry, no, suggest you get some curtains! Oh and by the way, I was here first"

Give in here, and I rather suspect this will not be the last time you get taken advantage of... but if you do insist on even continuing this discussion, make sure you get a LARGE amount of money for what is really a very unreasonable ask. After all, there are plenty of people living in flats that back onto communal gardens... this is hardly an uncommon situation.

LateStarter

Sorry, but:

One of the bedrooms of the downstairs property overlooks our garden half, and the other bedroom overlooks their garden half. Irrelevant.

So the crux of the matter hinges on how much advance notice we give them. You don't need to give notice to anyone now, why would you wan't to change that?

The buyer's argument - a legitimate one - is that they don't want us invading their privacy willy nilly. Not your problem. Surely they were informed of your RoW when they viewed/offered on the property.


I'm just trying to not get screwed in the process of being pragmatic.
Then, as others have suggested, get legal advice - that they pay for.

DandelionPatrol

insomniac_ut wrote: »

I'd like to address a few further points.

One of the bedrooms of the downstairs property overlooks our garden half, and the other bedroom overlooks their garden half. So the crux of the matter hinges on how much advance notice we give them.

The buyer's argument - a legitimate one - is that they don't want us invading their privacy willy nilly.

We already have a garden shed in the property, and have extensively refurbished our garden so we don't anticipate major work in the coming years.

However, regardless of how we re-draft the ROW agreement, I do want exceptions for things like compost, plants, gravel, outdoor furniture, potential future building works and the occasional lost cat.

I'm trying to be reasonable and pragmatic, since these are people we will be sharing the freehold with, and we'll be jointly responsible for the roof, pointing, etc.

I'm just trying to not get screwed in the process of being pragmatic.

The buyer's argument is not all that legitimate and as others have hinted, you are being far too accommodating.

Suppose your shed burns down as a result of a stray firework on 5th Nov ... You could need a new shed. And even if this does not happen, your eventual buyers if they have their heads screwed on, will want to be sure of their rights to replace the shed or whatever. These rights have a duration way beyond that of any shed.

Legally-practically, you will also need your mortgage lenders consent. Which will add to the costs.

If this property is shared freehold, these buyers do not look like good people to share the freehold with - they have very little concept of common interest and appear to show very little interest or understanding of how the property has to be shared to make things work well.

In your position, I would be telling them that there would be no way that I would change the ROW and I would hope that this would be enough to send them on their way, although I would have some sympathy for the person selling. But not enough sympathy to do anything to change the ROW.

princeofpounds

The buyer's argument - a legitimate one - is that they don't want us invading their privacy willy nilly.

It is NOT a legitimate argument. It is a wish, a desire, at your expense.

However, regardless of how we re-draft the ROW agreement, I do want exceptions for things like compost, plants, gravel, outdoor furniture, potential future building works and the occasional lost cat.

You are being an idiot if you go down this route. The reason that the ROW is so liberal is precisely because there are so many contingencies where access might be useful. If you include them all, you just end up back with what you had already, only more complicated and more likely to cause dispute.


DON'T BE AN IDIOT.

I'm trying to be reasonable and pragmatic, since these are people we will be sharing the freehold with, and we'll be jointly responsible for the roof, pointing, etc.

You might feel like you are being pragmatic, but you are not. You are giving up an important right attached to your property. No-one is forcing them to buy the house, if they want a house without a ROW over the garden then they shouldn't buy one!

G_M

Yes - 2 very valid new points raised:

1) the property is probably leasehold. Any change to the ROW, or the leases (if that's where the ROW is specified) will need the consent of the freeholder.

2) If either party has a mortgage, them the mortgage lender, or lenders, will need to give consent to any change, either to the ROW and/or a change/extension to the route of the alley, and/or to a reduction in the garden size.

halfabee

I'm (nearly) buying a house with a right of way through the back garden to other houses in the row of terraces, because we are on the end. The current owners say it's rarely used, and I don't have a problem with it. I can see why some people may think it's an inconvenience, especially if they are a bit anti-social, or plan to keep certain animals like dogs and don't want them escaping or biting people. Or kids, with the same consequences (escape, biting )

One thing to consider is that your right of way may have also been intended as an escape route, if your access through the front way is blocked. You need to be able to get out via the back alley. I am not sure if there would be some planning or building regulation that would require unrestricted access due to this, but worth looking into?

insomniac_ut

Understood, the property is share of freehold split between both units.

We are taking legal advice.

princeofpounds

Good point about the mortgage.


They will almost certainly say no, unless the access is preserved via being given the extra strip, or you pay whatever 5-figure sum they think the house is devalued by without the ROW off the mortgage. Plus the fees of course.

jimbog

The more time you reflect on this/seek legal advice/flap around the more vexed your neighbour will get with you when you eventually say 'no'. So just say it now

DandelionPatrol

insomniac_ut wrote: »

We are taking legal advice.

Well, I suppose you have to. Do not use any solicitor associated with buyer, seller or estate agent.

It is not the done thing to tell people not to bother with legal advice, but you will save yourself the money if you just say No.