Next door is selling - is now a good time to solve a land dispute?

stator

Just tell her you need access to the celler for maintenance and to inform the buyers of the same.
You don't have any claim to ownership of the celler since they've had posession of it for so long.

pinkshoes

I would still also notify the EA of the issue to make it clear that it needs sorting before a sale progresses.

That way the EA cannot deny knowing about it!

ajgwilliam

Thanks for all the replies.

A friend of mine raised an interesting point that I hadn't thought of already - insurance. Given that they have access to space under my house - from which it would be really easy to 1) burn my house down, and 2) break in and rob me - then would the owners of next door have to have that covered in their insurance - effectively insuring my property as well as their own....??

AdrianC

ajgwilliam wrote: »

Because they didn't offer any solution to how I put it right other than "as far as we're concerned it's yours. Bye. Not our problem."

That IS the solution, then.

Write them a letter thanking them nicely (make sure you keep a copy), then build a partition wall in the right place. Finish the job off by removing the old partition from half-way down your cellar.

Then sort your joists out from the comfort of your own cellar...

G_M

Just to throw another spanner in:

why do you think it's up to you to do the repairs? Indeed, why do you think you have the right to do the repairs?

If this IS a flying freehold, and the celler in question does belong to the neighbour, then the cellar ceiling belongs to the neighbour. Where is the boundary? The joists? Your floorboards? Who knows?

This is part of the problem with !!!!!!......

Soundgirlrocks

ajgwilliam wrote: »

If it makes a difference, both properties are leasehold, and on the same lease .

I think the point that is being missed is that the property is leasehold. With that in mind I would be thinking about this like leasehold flat (where your neighbours are underneath/ above /around you). With a lease you own the right to live somewhere for x years not the building or the ground its built on. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say they are all on the same lease.

Your lease should have a floor plan showing what you own (as will your neighbours lease) Although from what you have said it doesn't seem there is anything to dispute.

If you want to purchase the cellar, your lease & your neighbours will need amending and you will need the free holders permission.

G_M

Soundgirlrocks wrote: »

I think the point that is being missed is that the property is leasehold. With that in mind I would be thinking about this like leasehold flat (where your neighbours are underneath/ above /around you).

and maybe the responsibility for repairs lies with the freeholder?

Who is the freeholder?
What does the lease say about repairs?

martinsurrey

G_M wrote: »

and maybe the responsibility for repairs lies with the freeholder?

Who is the freeholder?
What does the lease say about repairs?

yeah, a lot of banter about freeholds on this thread, but the OP doesn't have a freehold, its a leasehold. Leaseholds don't mean you own the ground on which your lease sits, in fact you don't own any part of the building.

the freeholder owns the lot.

OP what does your lease say , in detail, not on the plan (which in this case is more than likely just showing the main floor level.

lincroft1710

ajgwilliam wrote: »

I have owned my house about 10 years. A few years back I worked out why my cellar is so small - half of my front room covers my cellar and the other half covers the cellar of my neighbour. Their cellar is within the boundaries of my property.

(The obvious point to make here is that it has always been like that - since there are two coal-holes in front of my house, and none next door).

Which implies that the houses were built (or adapted eons ago) so that your neighbour's cellar is under your property. Perhaps a quirk of design but it would suggest that you may not have grounds for claiming her cellar should form part of your property

Brock_and_Roll

Exactly!


It does not seem logical that for two similar adjoining properties built, presumably, in the age of steam, one would have two coal holes and the other none at all.


It would seem that the layout was deliberate to make coal delivery easier with each property having their respective piles of coal and no one really worrying about who owned the space above as long as each house had their fuel.