New build and public right of way through the house!

Jon_B_2

Realistically, the only outcome I can see is no sale and the chain collapsing.

I’d suspect even the developer would like that to happen, so they can sort out the PROW properly.

Davesnave

Jon_B wrote: »

Realistically, the only outcome I can see is no sale and the chain collapsing.

I’d suspect even the developer would like that to happen, so they can sort out the PROW properly.

While that might be true, the picture on the front of the local rag of the OP looking miserable in front of the house they can't buy, isn't going to play well with the directors.

Far better that she is seen looking moderately happy with the keys to another house, or better still, not seen and her story not told.

The fiasco over the RoW is going to play out anyway, but the OP is the human interest that'll make people read and remember it. That's her ace card.

Whether the OP is up for that sort of public exposure is another matter though. It's not everyone's style.

EachPenny

Davesnave wrote: »

The fiasco over the RoW is going to play out anyway, but the OP is the human interest that'll make people read and remember it. That's her ace card.

Whether the OP is up for that sort of public exposure is another matter though. It's not everyone's style.

If the press get involved I suspect the developer will simply blame the council, and the council will simply say there is a legal procedure and consultation to follow.

Most of the readers will nod, knowing as a fact that the council is always to blame and always has a bureaucratic excuse. The following day the story will be chip wrapping.

Now if there are eventually pictures of bulldozers demolishing the houses then people will get interested, but it won't help the OP much.

I still favour getting the best possible deal on a different house in the development, or else walk away.

moneyistooshorttomention

Davesnave wrote: »

While that might be true, the picture on the front of the local rag of the OP looking miserable in front of the house they can't buy, isn't going to play well with the directors.

Far better that she is seen looking moderately happy with the keys to another house, or better still, not seen and her story not told.

The fiasco over the RoW is going to play out anyway, but the OP is the human interest that'll make people read and remember it. That's her ace card.

Whether the OP is up for that sort of public exposure is another matter though. It's not everyone's style.

Agreed:T

Quite frankly - I don't see what OP has got to lose by the public exposure on front page of newspaper IF she has to play that "card up sleeve" because the developer isnt budging to give her what she wants.

It's hardly "public exposure" about an "interesting way of earning some income;)" or "past criminal doings".

The threat of publicity is for after the OP has tried to "get the best possible deal" - if they don't succeed.

AdrianC

My normal reply to this would be to say something like - "You have two choices - exchange and cross your fingers the developer sorts the PRoW out, or walk away."

But, really, assuming you are buying with a mortgage, you don't have that first choice - your lender will simply not lend you the money. The risk to them is too great. You cannot exchange, because you cannot complete. All you can do is delay (at the very best) until the developer sorts this show-stopper out.

There's no point in going public, because you simply haven't - can't - buy this house anyway.

Davesnave

AdrianC wrote: »

There's no point in going public, because you simply haven't - can't - buy this house anyway.

With respect, I don't think any of us think this house can be purchased any time soon, and that includes the OP.

AdrianC

Davesnave wrote: »

With respect, I don't think any of us think this house can be purchased any time soon, and that includes the OP.

"We are on the verge of exchange"...

Also, I'm not sure why the sol is suggesting compensation - since there's nothing to compensate at this stage, since there's no contract.

EachPenny

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Quite frankly - I don't see what OP has got to lose by the public exposure on front page of newspaper IF she has to play that "card up sleeve" because the developer isnt budging to give her what she wants.

If it were a case that the OP had been promised a council or HA house and was now left in the lurch then I'd agree with you.

But in this case the OP isn't homeless (yet) and the transaction is essentially a private one between the OP and the developer. In news terms this is similar to someone going to the papers complaining that Tesco refused to give them compensation when they wanted to buy a pair of brown shoes but the store only had black.

The newsworthy point is the chicken up between the developer and the council and the only 'value' within that is the schadenfreude aspect. It will give people a good laugh, but no 'heads will roll'. Unfortunately local papers no longer have the impact they once did (for many reasons I'm not going to get in to ) and most organisations (like the council and the developer) have well rehearsed strategies for deflecting this kind of coverage.

On the other hand once the OP's name and details have been published along with details of the situation, that information is 'out there'. Say for example you are the vendor of the next house the OP is interested in... before accepting their offer you might casually pop the OP's name into google - you know, just to make sure they are 'legit'. If the first result which comes up is a story about how they 'demanded' compensation for a property deal which went sour then how would that affect your decision on whether to accept the offer or not?

By all means let the developer know that you *might* go to the papers, but actually going through with it in the OP's circumstances is possibly not the best of ideas.

Davesnave

AdrianC wrote: »

"We are on the verge of exchange"...

Also, I'm not sure why the sol is suggesting compensation - since there's nothing to compensate at this stage, since there's no contract.

That was the OP's original statement of their position.

I believe her understanding has moved on, but you are right to emphasise that there is no contract and the builder could simply offer nothing.

It's for that reason people are suggesting ways of enocouraging the builder to offer something.

AdrianC

Davesnave wrote: »

That was the OP's original statement of their position.

I believe her understanding has moved on, but you are right to emphasise that there is no contract and the builder could simply offer nothing.

It's for that reason people are suggesting ways of enocouraging the builder to offer something.

There is nothing the builder CAN offer that will make the slightest practical difference - except for a completed redirection of the PRoW.