Solicitors conflicting on TP1.

Tom99

GP29 wrote: »

There is no way I can make our solicitor look at it this way. What happens if I tell the solicitor i no longer want to use them and instruct new solicitors? What if they see the issue as the same way? What are my own options?

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I assume the problem is that your solicitor is also acting for the mortgage co?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I think in your situation I would email 5 local solicitors for a quotation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You can attach a copy of the title document and title plan and explain.[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Title document say the is a yellow section on plan[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]There is no yellow on plan[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]No one can produce this plan or say where the yellow was.[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]There is no on-site 'build' other than the original house[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Developer will not play ball[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You can't get indemnity insurance as far as you are aware[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So either you buy this house with the title as is, or you don't buy it at all[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You don't want to waste your money and their time if they see this as a problem with only one solution ie the title gets changed.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You can explain that as far as you can see its not a big problem, even if man with yellow plan comes out of the woodwork at some future date. If you have by then built something that requires planning permission then you will already have LA consent. If you have built something that does not require planning permission you can then, after the event, apply for [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] a Lawful Development Certificate[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] from the LA which again will satisfy that title condition. The LA may think you are crazy spending money on a LDC you obviously don't need, say a shed, but it will satisfy the title condition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The LDC is confirmation that the LA have seen your plans for this 'development' you have made and will make no objection to it (ie the same as giving you approval) because it comes within your permitted development rights. [/FONT]

weavedribbon

GP29 wrote: »

Next door have had the restrictive covenant removed completely so that looks to be our only option.

Do you know how they got it removed and if it cost them anything? If the developer has done it for them can they not be persuaded or paid enough to do it for you as well?

GP29

Tom99 wrote: »

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I assume the problem is that your solicitor is also acting for the mortgage co?[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I think in your situation I would email 5 local solicitors for a quotation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You can attach a copy of the title document and title plan and explain.[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Title document say the is a yellow section on plan[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]There is no yellow on plan[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]No one can produce this plan or say where the yellow was.[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]There is no on-site 'build' other than the original house[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Developer will not play ball[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You can't get indemnity insurance as far as you are aware[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So either you buy this house with the title as is, or you don't buy it at all[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You don't want to waste your money and their time if they see this as a problem with only one solution ie the title gets changed.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You can explain that as far as you can see its not a big problem, even if man with yellow plan comes out of the woodwork at some future date. If you have by then built something that requires planning permission then you will already have LA consent. If you have built something that does not require planning permission you can then, after the event, apply for [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] a Lawful Development Certificate[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] from the LA which again will satisfy that title condition. The LA may think you are crazy spending money on a LDC you obviously don't need, say a shed, but it will satisfy the title condition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The LDC is confirmation that the LA have seen your plans for this 'development' you have made and will make no objection to it (ie the same as giving you approval) because it comes within your permitted development rights. [/FONT]

Thanks for some superb advice, I’m presuming that most firms will be shut for Christmas so I’ll prepare some emails once I’ve finished work and send them all out to get some advice. Thanks again.

And in response to the other reply, I don’t know how they sorted it, potential it was spotted and sorted when the house was brought new but I have no idea how any other house sale on the site has gotten over this or if any other house has it.

Tom99

You could always spend a few quid for the title and title plan for some nearby properties. Cost is £3 title and £3 plan so, for £30, you can choose 5 likely nearby properties and see if any have both the condition in the tile and the yellow plan - it might help you with the quotes, as you will be able to say the situation on these 5 nearby properties is .........

GP29

Just a little update for those interested.

Ask the solicitor for the deeds to the semi detached attached to us and when that house was sold by the developer, the covenant was still there but I have no idea if it has been removed now, I’m presuming it is still there as the house was sold again this year? So some houses had it removed, some didn’t.

I spoke to another solicitor I know for some advice and they told me it would need to be removed or amended and that the developer would do it for a fee.

Sellers solicitors have asked the developers solicitors for more plans. But they are off until 2nd January so now nothing for 10 days!

Seems there are different opinions about this, which confuses a newbie like me even more.

Land_Registry

GP29 wrote: »

Just a little update for those interested.

Ask the solicitor for the deeds to the semi detached attached to us and when that house was sold by the developer, the covenant was still there but I have no idea if it has been removed now, I’m presuming it is still there as the house was sold again this year? So some houses had it removed, some didn’t.

I spoke to another solicitor I know for some advice and they told me it would need to be removed or amended and that the developer would do it for a fee.

Sellers solicitors have asked the developers solicitors for more plans. But they are off until 2nd January so now nothing for 10 days!

Seems there are different opinions about this, which confuses a newbie like me even more.

Things will always vary as removing or amending a restrictive covenant is fairly rare and how and when it was imposed and for whose benefit can impact.

It would be interesting to see IF any have actually removed it or amended it from a registration perspective. If you'd like me to take a look at an example then email us and refer to MSE - Solicitors conflicting on TP1
I won't share specifics but it would be interesting to see what, if anything, has played out before
On the apparently inconsistent approach to conveyancing around no action or action on these that is not unusual in my experience of reading similar threads and enquiries raised with us. That can stretch from simply not spotting the covenants v plan mismatch to assessing the 'risk' differently as you have perhaps experienced

GP29

Land_Registry wrote: »

Things will always vary as removing or amending a restrictive covenant is fairly rare and how and when it was imposed and for whose benefit can impact.

It would be interesting to see IF any have actually removed it or amended it from a registration perspective. If you'd like me to take a look at an example then email me at customer.service@landregistry.gov.uk and refer to MSE - Solicitors conflicting on TP1
I won't share specifics but it would be interesting to see what, if anything, has played out before
On the apparently inconsistent approach to conveyancing around no action or action on these that is not unusual in my experience of reading similar threads and enquiries raised with us. That can stretch from simply not spotting the covenants v plan mismatch to assessing the 'risk' differently as you have perhaps experienced

Thanks for the reply, I will email you.

As a first time buyer this is all new to me and how it works. I have seen the deeds for number 10 (around the corner) and the Planning Conditions title is completely removed. Number 14 (house attached) still had the covenant in. Seems the wording about it is interpreted different by each solicitor.

Land_Registry

GP29 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply, I will email you.

As a first time buyer this is all new to me and how it works. I have seen the deeds for number 10 (around the corner) and the Planning Conditions title is completely removed. Number 14 (house attached) still had the covenant in. Seems the wording about it is interpreted different by each solicitor.

Email received but you didn't provide any address details so unable to look. Will wait for your email reply

Land_Registry

Based on the details provided it appears that a mistake was made in the conveyancing completed at the time OP's Mother purchased the property several years ago.

As OP mentions the developer will have used a template Transfer at the time but for whatever reason(s) eikther the wrong one may have been used or the required changes perhaps not made.

The neighbouring properties confirm the yellow/cross hatching does affect some of them. No 10 does not include the specific covenant or reference in its Transfer so the conveyancing was completed correctly it seems and that's what you meant by 'removed' as at source and not for example later by a separate deed.

None appear to have had their Transfers amended/varied since.

The OP has the advantage of the fact that the original purchaser is still the owner. So if the developer is still available and willing to cooperate then a legal deed amending/varying the original Transfer may be the best option here.