Is there a legal solution for a landlocked property?

moneyistooshorttomention

Mallotum_X wrote: »

If the house is mortgaged, then presumably it was bought with a mortgage?

If so then the mortgage would have covered all of the property at that time, house and gardens. If the owner subsequently split the property up into 3 sections then he would have needed the mortgage companies permission... unlikely to have been granted, or potentially the mortgage in reality is still in place.

Worth exploring that as it may be the mortgage co does in fact have a charge over everything despite the old owner thinking he was being clever.

Worth spending out a few £ to get the Land Registry entry for this. I've found, before now, that it was an extra thing with an extra charge payable (ie over and above the Title Plan).

That would show the name of any mortgage company and of any companies having a charge on the house and might be a way forward.

moneyistooshorttomention

Alarae wrote: »

The bank's solicitor will not investigate solutions to the problem. They will state the facts and say it is up to the Purchaser to take a view on it. It may be they will advise there is an 'implied right of way' to the property for use and provide an absence of easement indemnity policy.

That sounds like another possible way forward - ie asking them if there is an "implied ROW" and if it would be possible to have an easement indemnity policy.

It doesn't seem very likely that previous house-owner would be there standing guard in the gardens of his former house, so a suitable indemnity policy in case he started "throwing legal thunderbolts" might be a way forward - followed, subsequently, by adversely possessing your own gardens some time down the line.

Mallotum_X

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

That sounds like another possible way forward - ie asking them if there is an "implied ROW" and if it would be possible to have an easement indemnity policy.

It doesn't seem very likely that previous house-owner would be there standing guard in the gardens of his former house, so a suitable indemnity policy in case he started "throwing legal thunderbolts" might be a way forward - followed, subsequently, by adversely possessing your own gardens some time down the line.

If the previous owner keeps the land and lets assume the mortgage company doesn't then come after him for the rest of his assets then he would be legally allowed to erect a fence to defend his property from trespassers.

However, lets assume the house is sold - with no current access that price will end up a long way below market value. There is a very real possibility that this would be below the outstanding mortgage debt.

The mortgage company would then come after his remaining assets to make up the shortfall. Those assets will be the land at the front and back of the property. These would then be sold, the owner of the house would want to buy them, but there may be interest from other people, who would also know that without access the home value would be significantly impaired.

The old owner has split the land up, he almost certainly did that for a reason, and is unlikely to simply forget about his land, you will therefore never get adverse possession, so forget about trying that approach.

An insurance policy is unlikely to be of any use. You know already you have no access, you know you are likely to have an un-co-operative land owner.

Hence the agent telling you all this as its a specialist purchase

moneyistooshorttomention

Maybe/maybe not re whether Mr Awkward would fence those gardens around. Maybe the nature of them is such that he physically couldn't do it?

I doubt if he has thought that far ahead.

One certainty is Mr Awkward doesn't have too many brain cells to rub together - because, if he did, then he would see the sense of maximising the price obtainable for the house rather than playing silly b's like he is. People like that don't tend to think any further ahead than "tomorrow" in my experience.

Mallotum_X

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Maybe/maybe not re whether Mr Awkward would fence those gardens around. Maybe the nature of them is such that he physically couldn't do it?

I doubt if he has thought that far ahead.

One certainty is Mr Awkward doesn't have too many brain cells to rub together - because, if he did, then he would see the sense of maximising the price obtainable for the house rather than playing silly b's like he is. People like that don't tend to think any further ahead than "tomorrow" in my experience.

I'd suggest he has thought ahead, hes thinking that his land will be worth something...

He doesnt even need to fence all around it, a nice 6foot fence up against the front of the house itself will stop anyone opening the door or window....

TBeckett100

OP how is your pole vaulting skills?

eloy7

TBeckett100 wrote: »

OP how is your pole vaulting skills?

I can practice but how high is still considered his land?

eloy7

Alarae wrote: »

Properties with legal problems are not resolved by the bank usually. They are offered on a sold as seen basis, if no one is interested then it goes to auction.

It has been already scheduled for an auction. I offered during the pre-auction marketing.

bouicca21

I looked at a repo flat - Mr A owned the leasehold and a 50% share of freehold. He was repossessed. At auction Mr B bought the leasehold cheap. But Mr B and Mr A were actually the same seriously dodgy person. He got repossessed again and disappeared, so now the situation was that the freehold and leasehold appeared to be separate, the freeholder was absent but could pop up at any time; the roof leaked so how were repairs to be sorted out? Major refurbishment required. No one knew whether the garden was part of the leasehold or the freehold (though I suppose the answer to that one would eventually turn up on a search).

It was potentially gorgeous. I still wonder whether the same guy bought it yet a third time, as no one really wanted to get too involved in all the legal problems.

If OP's original owner split the title up he may well have reckoned on buying the house back for peanuts, then selling the lot on before the bank wake up.

Alarae

Then I would advise to get specialist legal advice on your end, as you won't get squat from the bank's side. Once a problem property is put into auction it is usually because of complex legal problems. They will simply advise the auctioneer of the issue and it is down to the Purchaser to be satisfied with the title of the property and any issues associated with it.

As you are querying this purchase, I would recommend you run extremely far. These issues will not be resolved before you exchange/complete and I highly doubt it will get rectified down the line unless you pony up a lot of money to purchase the front garden at least. I would not touch a property with legal access issues with a barge pole- as previously mentioned he is entitled to erect a fence around his land and stop you from entering your own front door. An indemnity policy will pay out if a legal challenge is mounted but do you really want the stress?