Solicitors conflicting on TP1.

GP29

I’m in desperate need of some advice.

I’m buying my mums house, it has been going on 5 months now this sticking issue is on the TP1 from when my mum brought the house new it says under ‘Planning Conditions’ something along the lines of, nothing can be built in the cross hatched yellow area on the plan without permission from the local authorities.

On the plan, there is no yellow cross hatched area. Our solicitor has tried to get indemnity insurance, despite my mums solicitors saying it is not needed, nobody will insure it, presumably because they don’t actually know what they are insuring, which my mums solicitors say shows it isn’t an issue.

Next doors house has sold with the Planning condition amended, evidence for my solicitor to say it needs to be sorted.

He has suggested going back to the developer to have the condition removed or amended to say ‘if any’ my mums solicitors have said that isn’t needed and have asked her to ask me to ask them to waive it. Our solicitors have asked me to ask my mum to ask them to go back to the developer.

I’m stuck in the middle, out of my depth and seem to be going nowhere. Any advice please?

da_rule

Are you purchasing with a mortgage? As it may be your mortgage lender that is insisting on it.

The clause is somewhat ambiguous if it makes reference to something on a plan which doesn’t exist.

GP29

da_rule wrote: »

Are you purchasing with a mortgage? As it may be your mortgage lender that is insisting on it.

The clause is somewhat ambiguous if it makes reference to something on a plan which doesn’t exist.

Yes we are, the lender doesn’t know about it yet, I suggested putting it to them to see if they would still be willing to lend, he told me their first question would be ‘Do you advice us to lend the money?’ And his response would be ‘No’

I should add that the whole TP1 is quite confusing, it makes reference to a garage and the house doesn’t even have a garage. The whole document is very generic and seems that it is used for every house on every plot that they sell.

Tom99

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So it's your solicitor who is sticking out is that right?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Is this 'permission from the local authorities' qualified in any way? What sort of permission?[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You say its under a heading 'Planning Conditions'. If there is no further mention of the type of permission required, I think the lease might be interpreted that you need planning permission.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Look back at the developers planning consent granted to develop the site by this same LA if you can, how long ago was this. Does it referred to areas not to be developed? Are they cross hatched yellow or something? Ie they did not get transferred to your Mum's title plan.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Presumably the developer did not just decided to introduce a few cross hatched yellow bits because he likes to make things complicated, they were there for a reason.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If that does not work, lets look at the worst possible situation, someone finds the plan and the whole plot is hatched yellow apart from the house there now.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So you can't build on the area. Does the title have a definition of 'Build'?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Even though my house does not have any of these cross hatched yellow areas that does not mean I can build over the whole garden. I am fairy restricted as to what I can do using Permitted Development Rights, after which I require the LA consent just like you.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So at the very most, even if all the land was hatched yellow, all you have lost is your permitted development rights.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Many properties already have these permitted development rights withdrawn, for various reasons by the LA and they will sell no problem.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So put this to your solicitor, what's the worst case and does it really affect the value of what you are buying today.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So if the Yellow Hatched Area covered everything you would need LA Permission, even if you did not think you need planning permission.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]What you could do therefore if you plan a small extension or even a shed is to:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]'To be certain that a proposed development is lawful and does not require an application for planning permission it is possible to apply for a ‘Lawful Development Certificate’ from the local authority' [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/lawful-development-certificates[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]To me the missing yellow would not be a problem. If it later came to light I had built in the yellow then I will already have LA consent because it needed a planning application or I apply for a Lawful Development Certificate because I thought it came within my permitted development rights which is a 'permission' which ought to satisfy that title restriction.[/FONT]

GP29

Tom99 wrote: »

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So it's your solicitor who is sticking out is that right?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Is this 'permission from the local authorities' qualified in any way? What sort of permission?[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You say its under a heading 'Planning Conditions'. If there is no further mention of the type of permission required, I think the lease might be interpreted that you need planning permission.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Look back at the developers planning consent granted to develop the site by this same LA if you can, how long ago was this. Does it referred to areas not to be developed? Are they cross hatched yellow or something? Ie they did not get transferred to your Mum's title plan.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Presumably the developer did not just decided to introduce a few cross hatched yellow bits because he likes to make things complicated, they were there for a reason.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If that does not work, lets look at the worst possible situation, someone finds the plan and the whole plot is hatched yellow apart from the house there now.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So you can't build on the area. Does the title have a definition of 'Build'?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Even though my house does not have any of these cross hatched yellow areas that does not mean I can build over the whole garden. I am fairy restricted as to what I can do using Permitted Development Rights, after which I require the LA consent just like you.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So at the very most, even if all the land was hatched yellow, all you have lost is your permitted development rights.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Many properties already have these permitted development rights withdrawn, for various reasons by the LA and they will sell no problem.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So put this to your solicitor, what's the worst case and does it really affect the value of what you are buying today.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So if the Yellow Hatched Area covered everything you would need LA Permission, even if you did not think you need planning permission.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]What you could do therefore if you plan a small extension or even a shed is to:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]'To be certain that a proposed development is lawful and does not require an application for planning permission it is possible to apply for a ‘Lawful Development Certificate’ from the local authority' [/

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]To me the missing yellow would not be a problem. If it later came to light I had built in the yellow then I will already have LA consent because it needed a planning application or I apply for a Lawful Development Certificate because I thought it came within my permitted development rights which is a 'permission' which ought to satisfy that title restriction.[/FONT]

Thanks for your detailed reply.

The actual statement reads

‘Not to allow any building, structure or erection of any kind (including caravans, walls and fences) to be erected or placed on the land cross hatched yellow on the plan attached without prior written consent of the local planning authority.’

The plans that we have contain no yellow hatched area, anywhere on the plan at all. Which reads to me and my mums solicitors that simply there isn’t a yellow cross hatched area and no restriction to build on.

Our solicitor argues that if the statement contained ‘if any’ was in that statement then it would be acceptable. He is not budging, he quite frankly says that it needs to be amended. There is no existing extension on the house, which is probably why no indemnity insurer will give us a policy.

There is no mention of this in the actual searches.

I have put it to him that there is simply no yellow area but he is adamant that it still needs to be amended.

As a first time buyer, I’m not really sure who to believe. I spoke to a local developer who we do some work for and he said he couldn’t see it was an issue but that we had to convince our solicitor about this, I had no luck.

Would it be worth trying to speak to the head of the conveyancing department rather than just the case handler? Every time I speak to him which is almost every day, we just go around in circles.

AdrianC

This is a fairly recently built property, so all the documentation around planning should be on the local authority's website. Does that show which area's the relevant one?

But, as I read it, apart from "You can't park a caravan or put a shed there" (Well, woo. Nobody's going to do anything about that...), all it says is "you need PP to build something there."

Is there a potential issue arounding sightlines or light to another property that might give you a hint?

GP29

AdrianC wrote: »

This is a fairly recently built property, so all the documentation around planning should be on the local authority's website. Does that show which area's the relevant one?

But, as I read it, apart from "You can't park a caravan or put a shed there" (Well, woo. Nobody's going to do anything about that...), all it says is "you need PP to build something there."

Is there a potential issue arounding sightlines or light to another property that might give you a hint?

Which is how I read it and how my mums solicitors read it, ours however says it needs to be amended as there is no yellow area, he is concerned about in the future, an extension or conservatory put up by ourselves or whoever we were to sell to. All it reads as is that we would need Planning permission to build anything, well isn’t that very common?

Had a quick search for plans online but no luck, will have another look later.

If we were to build in the garden then it would be clearly in the view of about 5 other houses.

Our solicitor doesn’t even dispute that the yellow area is non existent, he just says the wording says, there is and that’s what needs to be changed. He won’t budge or listen to what I am suggesting and wants it removed from the land registry form.

davidmcn

GP29 wrote: »

The actual statement reads

‘Not to allow any building, structure or erection of any kind (including caravans, walls and fences) to be erected or placed on the land cross hatched yellow on the plan attached without prior written consent of the local planning authority.’

My opinion is that simply replicates whatever the planning requirements are - you're only going to be able to get consent of the planning authority for development for which their consent would be required anyway. So it's fairly meaningless (other than giving whoever has the benefit of the covenant an extra stick to beat you with if you did something in breach of planning).

GP29

davidmcn wrote: »

My opinion is that simply replicates whatever the planning requirements are - you're only going to be able to get consent of the planning authority for development for which their consent would be required anyway. So it's fairly meaningless (other than giving whoever has the benefit of the covenant an extra stick to beat you with if you did something in breach of planning).

What do you think my next move should be?

Tom99

GP29 wrote: »

Would it be worth trying to speak to the head of the conveyancing department rather than just the case handler? Every time I speak to him which is almost every day, we just go around in circles.

Are you using a cheapo online conveyancing company, it sound like it?
In which case they will be box tickers 'computer says no', its possible you won't get through to them.

Any reasonable property solicitor would see that the very worst case is that someone pops up in the future with this yellow plan. Since what ever you may have done will have to have been with planning permission if you needed it or within your permitted development rights for which you can get a Lawful Development Certificate this really is no big deal. If your build is unlawful then you will have far more problems that this man with the yellow plan

hb2

Realistically, is going back to the developer an option? If so, it would seem to be the way out of the impasse.