Blocked Access and new owner stating no easements

sugarflux

Hi
Hoping someone might be able to provide some (not legally binding!) advice...

Part of our property (freehold) was sold off many years ago - a room at the front and a garage at the back - and the TR1 mentions no buildings or services within 3 metres of the retained property and mentions permissions for boundaries etc.

Recently the owner split up the sold off part of the property (the garage) to a new owner who has subsequently had planning permission passed to knock it down and build a house.

I doubt there is much we can do about that however, he has also fixed metal security fences, blocking our garden access (a wooden gate) and attached these to our own fence.

On speaking with the new owner asking him to retain our access (by removing the security fences or at least a providing us a key) he stated that there were no easements and no tr1 included in his sale and therefore he doesn’t care that he’s blocking our access.

So my questions are:

1. Should the original TR1 agreement and covenants have been transferred and still apply to the sold property and

2. What are my next steps to try to resolve this situation amicably - do I still have a right to my access even though it is not actually mentioned in the TR1 or deeds (and can’t prove how long it has been there)?

I know that at some point I may need proper paid legal assistance but at the moment I don’t even know where to start in terms of information gathering or whether there is anything I can do. Any help appreciated...

Thanks in advance

~S~

stator

Does your home insurance come with legal expenses?

sugarflux

Good question - and one I hadn!!!8217;t thought of! I don!!!8217;t know off the top of my head but will check...

moneyistooshorttomention

sugarflux wrote: »

Good question - and one I hadn!!!8217;t thought of! I don!!!8217;t know off the top of my head but will check...

Probably not then in that case....

As I know my own policy has that legal add-on as an extra that I have to pay £y for each year on top of that basic standard insurance.

I think what you are probably looking at is as to whether there is an "easement of necessity" - ie if access is needed, but has become literally impossible, then you might have an easement of necessity on foot.

BTW - I doubt whether they are allowed to affix their property to yours (his fence being attached to your fence).

Cakeguts

How does he know that he has right of access? I might be that you have all the rights?

PasturesNew

Only your documents and his documents will show you what's what. Every set is different, so you can't go by what anybody else's has done in a similar-looking situation.

Get yours first and see what it says .... if in doubt, download a copy of his (£3 online).

moneyistooshorttomention

Certainly make sure you have the Title Plan and Register entry from Land Registry to check what's down in writing.

But I don't think any missing wording would preclude having "easement of necessity" for access if it came to it.

Hopefully one of the legal posters will be along soon to clarify on this.

BTW - do you have a diagram you could put up to indicate the position (as it's a bit difficult to picture what you mean).

[Deleted User]

If you own the property (or parts of it, it seems) We can't see any of the paperwork which will help decide what your neighbour can or can't do. You really need to take all your freehold/leasehold/sale paperwork to a lawyer but possibly with so many transactions taking place on the areas relevant to your building, it will not be a quick answer.

Or are you renting? I'm not clear.

If you own the property, what made you buy it with all this confusion? I'm not sure how a mortgage could be granted with unclear title to a whole room in the property.

If you are renting, I'd move out ASAP and tell LL why. Its for them to pursue the problem.

sugarflux

Hi all

Thanks for replies so far and apologies if I haven!!!8217;t been clear on the situation.

So to clarify:
We own the house but the front room and the garages at the rear of the garden were sold off in the 70s as a single (freehold) transfer.

Along with the TR1 there were covenants laid out which state that no buildings can be constructed and no services can be put in place within 3 metres of the !!!8216;retained land!!!8217; without consent.

More recently the owner of the !!!8216;front room!!!8217; and the garages split up the title and sold the garages at auction to a new owner - with planning permission to demolish and build a house.

The garages have a concrete drive (of sorts) in front of them and our rear gate from the garden opens on to this drive.

Two issues here.

The first is that the new owner has erected metal security fences across the drive - on his land - but effectively cutting off our access to the garden.

The second is that the plans for the new house show a wall built completely across our rear gate.

The other point raised above is that the security fences are currently attached to our fence but this is a minor issue compared with those mentioned above!

My understanding of the TR1 from the original transaction is that when the new owner purchased the garage the original covenants should have been transferred (and would still apply) to the new title.

I will need to get legal advice however I need to know (or have a good idea) that it!!!8217;s going to be worth fighting for - otherwise I can!!!8217;t afford to spend out if it!!!8217;s something I!!!8217;m just going to have to take on the chin.

Thanks again for all your help - I will try and post some plans to help visualise the layout when I get chance!

~S~

G_M

sugarflux wrote: »

So to clarify:
We own the house but the front room and the garages at the rear of the garden were sold off in the 70s as a single (freehold) transfer.
I don't understand how you could sell the front room of your house:
* is there a room above it eg bedroom? Who owns this
* how does the new owner access the front room - via your front door?
????

You need to explain the layout better.

Along with the TR1 there were covenants laid out which state that no buildings can be constructed and no services can be put in place within 3 metres of the !!!8216;retained land!!!8217; without consent.
Forget the TR1.

What does the Title to the sold land say?
What does the conveyance (referred to in the Title?) say?

What does the Title to the land you kept say?
What does the conveyance (referred to in the Title?) say?

PLEASE QUOTE FULL WORDING IN FULL.

More recently the owner of the !!!8216;front room!!!8217; and the garages split up the title and sold the garages at auction to a new owner - with planning permission to demolish and build a house.
As above - look at the Title to the sold land
PLEASE QUOTE FULL WORDING IN FULL.

The garages have a concrete drive (of sorts) in front of them and our rear gate from the garden opens on to this drive.
What does the Title to your land say?
Does it refer to a conveyance? What does that say

PLEASE QUOTE FULL WORDING IN FULL.
Two issues here.

The first is that the new owner has erected metal security fences across the drive - on his land - but effectively cutting off our access to the garden.
Do you have a ROW, either
* explicit in your Title or
* via an easement of necessity

The second is that the plans for the new house show a wall built completely across our rear gate.
Did you object to the planning applcation?

The other point raised above is that the security fences are currently attached to our fence but this is a minor issue compared with those mentioned above!
Un-attach the fence?

My understanding of the TR1 from the original transaction is that when the new owner purchased the garage the original covenants should have been transferred (and would still apply) to the new title.
Read the relevant Titles.

£3 here to buy each Title, and £3 for each Plan.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Also, is there any way of getting from your garden to the public road without passing through the land attached to the garages? That is, could you just put in a gate somewhere else and get access?

I must admit the front room situation baffles me as well, although it doesn't seem relevant to this.