Conveyancer insisting on an indemnity policy for access

rtho782

We're deep in the process of buying our first house.

Our solicitor has decided we need an indemnity policy for access, as the driveway is slightly offset from the drop kerb.

There is plenty of parking off the driveway, and the driveway was originally lawn, and could be returned to lawn.

My position is that either I will return it to lawn, or I will pay the council for a new drop kerb (by enquiring about it I will invalidate the indemnity policy) so the policy is pointless. Without a driveway, there is no impact to the value of the security.

The solicitor then tried to say it was also about access on foot and access for services. I pointed out that I did not need right of access to walk on the public footpath and enter my gate, and that the land was owned by the council, who built and originally owned the house, so if services have no right to pass under the grass verge, it was the council that put them in their own land, and they are now owned by the utility company anyway.

The solicitor then decided it was about the driveway again.

Am I being unreasonable? This seems like just a way to sell me an expensive insurance policy I don't want or need and can never claim on, and increase my solicitor fee.

stator

Sounds like you are right but for some people having a driveway might affect the value of the house. You could appeal direct to the lender if you wanted.

rtho782

Thanks,

It's not so much a driveway as a front garden covered in tarmac, but I see your point.

However, as I'm perfectly able to decide to rip it up and make it a lawn again, if the lender is only happy to lend if the driveway exists, they should surely make that a condition of the mortgage offer!

kremmen

When I sold my house to my daughter a policy was required for a 6" strip of land in front of the garage from the road as no one could say who owned it.
When the house was sold subsequently no one cared.
I suppose you have to decide if it is worth holding up the process or if it bothers you that much do the MSE thing and shop around.

Paul

moneyistooshorttomention

I guess it's relevant how much this indemnity policy would cost.

When I came to buy my current house my legal executive that did this said about buying one of those chancel insurance policies just in case. I thought I almost certainly didnt need it - but it was only around £20 - so decided that part of my time I'd spend googling like mad to see if I really needed it was worth more than £20 and I might just as well pay it and save myself the hassle of investigating.

A couple of hundred £s on the other hand might be a bit of a different matter.

I'm someone that thinks in terms of ripping up tarmac etc and turning front gardens back into front gardens - so I can understand it makes no difference to you personally. However, I guess you never know if you might sell the house in the future and it would be to someone planning on doing the reverse.

rtho782

It is a couple of hundred pounds, it's also a £75 increase in solicitors fees for dealing with it.

So overall it's about £250. Not a lot I guess, when the house is like 1000x that, but I don't see why I should pay that for nothing!

martindow

If you are using a mortgage to buy this house, they may insist on things like this. The solicitor will let them know of anything that could affect the value of the house. Off street parking is likely to increase the its value I would have thought.

SmlSave

rtho782 wrote: »

It is a couple of hundred pounds, it's also a £75 increase in solicitors fees for dealing with it.

£75 for dealing with an indemnity policy does seem very high, are you in the London area or with a firm that charges £50+ for everything them deem 'extra'? (but is actually standard)

Just being nosey

davidmcn

rtho782 wrote: »

if the lender is only happy to lend if the driveway exists, they should surely make that a condition of the mortgage offer!

It's more the fact that the valuation will have included the fact that there is off-street parking. You may well be correct in saying that a lack of parking wouldn't materially affect the value of the property, but that's something which can only be answered by the lender going back to the valuer and asking them to confirm they agree - which may be more hassle and delay than just getting a policy.

Alter_ego

I'd be reminding the solicitor that clients "Instruct" solicitors.
If the lender is insisting that's a different matter.