New deed required for garden land sale

tizzle6560

Hi all,

Neighbours of ours that back onto our garden would like to purchase some of our land to extend their garden space.

Both the mortgage lender and Freeholder have agreed to this, so do I simply need to instruct a solicitor to draw up the requisite deed variation and plans, or is there something else glaringly obvious I'm missing?

Thanks

dc197

Devaluing your property for a short-term gain is only one solution.
Have you considered leasing part of your land to them, instead of selling?

AnotherJoe

How do you know they are devaluing their property? For example, garden is 120 metres long, they sell the bottom 20 metres. Won't make a jot of difference.

tizzle6560

AnotherJoe wrote: »

How do you know they are devaluing their property? For example, garden is 120 metres long, they sell the bottom 20 metres. Won't make a jot of difference.

This is in fact entirely correct. The garden is 82ft long and they are looking to purchase approx 12ft form the back. Currently there are two derelict brick outhouses there so it would actually be doing me a favour.

the mortgage lender has also confirmed that it would not devalue the property from their POV too.

dc197

A house with a 70ft garden is less attractive - to me - than the same house with an 82ft garden. I'd rather have the 17% larger one. I'd pay less, other might too.

Thrugelmir

tizzle6560 wrote: »

This is in fact entirely correct. The garden is 82ft long and they are looking to purchase approx 12ft form the back.

What's behind them buying 12ft of garden?

tizzle6560

dc197 wrote: »

A house with a 70ft garden is less attractive - to me - than the same house with an 82ft garden. I'd rather have the 17% larger one. I'd pay less, other might too.

With all due respect, I haven't asked what you or others might prefer if it was them. I'm asking for some guidance on the process

tizzle6560

Thrugelmir wrote: »

What's behind them buying 12ft of garden?

They have a tiny (in comparison to ours) 15ft rear garden, no grass area, and two small kids who like to run around. they don't really want to have to move so this is the more feasible option.

Doozergirl

dc197 wrote: »

A house with a 70ft garden is less attractive - to me - than the same house with an 82ft garden. I'd rather have the 17% larger one. I'd pay less, other might too.

A 70ft garden is either acceptable or not to you.

You'd either buy it or you wouldn't. Unless you're buying a new build, nobody has the luxury of comparing houses that are identical other than 12ft of garden to be able to reduce the offer price to account for it.

tizzle6560

Doozergirl wrote: »

A 70ft garden is either acceptable or not to you.

You'd either buy it or you wouldn't. Unless you're buying a new build, nobody has the luxury of comparing houses that are identical other than 12ft of garden to be able to reduce the offer price to account for it.

well said.

AnotherJoe

dc197 wrote: »

A house with a 70ft garden is less attractive - to me - than the same house with an 82ft garden. I'd rather have the 17% larger one. I'd pay less, other might too.

So when you are buying houses, is that the sort of choice you often find?
Two identical houses, one with a garden 12ft longer than the other? They aren't in different streets or areas, different house layouts, different decor, different work needing to be done? They are identical and thus easily comparable? And in this situation, you'd pay more for the one with a 12ft bit of land with two derelict brick outbuildings on it?

Each to their own.

I find life is usually not so clear cut as that