We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
Title Issue - Scotland - After Purchase
scotch_bonnet
Posts: 9 Forumite
Bit of a long winded one this so grab a tea. Hopefully if anyone can assist it would be appreciated. I’m really not savvy with this kind of thing and it is the purchase of my first home….somewhat sadly.
I bought my first home back in late November 18. This was in Scotland – best pointing out as realise the law is different here.
I viewed the property three times before progressing matters. It was the seller of the property who showed me around not the estate agent. The property is older being built in mid/late 1800’s. It was previously a house but then was split into two. I purchased the lower property, upstairs was the bigger of the two and a family stays here. I think they moved in around 12/13 years ago.
The seller of the property explained that an outbuilding belonged to the property I was buying known as a scullery. This however was being used by the property upstairs, the seller said she didn’t want to get involved but that this can be sorted out via the solicitor. The seller hadn't been staying in the property but had been renting it out for a number of years.
I was very much aware of this in the build up to matters. Standard process of offer being made, accepted and various emails/calls enquired about said scullery. Long and short of it is I was informed this belonged to my property, this would be included in the missives and that this required to be vacated upon my move in date. Move in date comes, get the keys but said scullery is still in use. I raised this immediately with the solicitor I had used (so raised within the five days after completion date)
I also introduced myself to the neighbour and politely enquired about said scullery. I was informed this belongs to them and that the scullery which used to belong to my property was knocked down in the 80’s and the land mine used to be on belongs to them also. She also informed me she raised this with the seller’s solicitor a number of times.
This then dragged on and on with me just chasing the solicitor I had used. I was sent a copy of the schedule from when the neighbour upstairs had bought the property which states private front and back garden and the scullery. It was the same solicitor/estate agent that sold her place back 12/13 years ago that were now selling the property I purchased, my shiny schedule stated it comes with front and rear private gardens, no mention of the scullery. I was aware early doors that the rear garden belonged to them after checking with the solicitor I had instructed.
At the moment it seems more likely the scullery in question does belong to the upstairs property and a possibility a previous scullery has now been knocked down.
My title deeds show the date of first registration being 2/9/1998 and land certificate updated to 6/2/2006. This states –
Subjects 1 X Rd within the land edged red on the title plan, being the lower flat of building 2 and 1 X Road. Together with the scullery built out to the back of said flat but without any right to any ground other than a joint right with the proprietors of the upper flat 2 X road, aforsesaid to the solum of ground on which the said lower flat and scullery are built, and a right of access round the east end of said building to the back door into the said scullery’
*address made up but I am number 1 and neighbour is number 2
I bought my first home back in late November 18. This was in Scotland – best pointing out as realise the law is different here.
I viewed the property three times before progressing matters. It was the seller of the property who showed me around not the estate agent. The property is older being built in mid/late 1800’s. It was previously a house but then was split into two. I purchased the lower property, upstairs was the bigger of the two and a family stays here. I think they moved in around 12/13 years ago.
The seller of the property explained that an outbuilding belonged to the property I was buying known as a scullery. This however was being used by the property upstairs, the seller said she didn’t want to get involved but that this can be sorted out via the solicitor. The seller hadn't been staying in the property but had been renting it out for a number of years.
I was very much aware of this in the build up to matters. Standard process of offer being made, accepted and various emails/calls enquired about said scullery. Long and short of it is I was informed this belonged to my property, this would be included in the missives and that this required to be vacated upon my move in date. Move in date comes, get the keys but said scullery is still in use. I raised this immediately with the solicitor I had used (so raised within the five days after completion date)
I also introduced myself to the neighbour and politely enquired about said scullery. I was informed this belongs to them and that the scullery which used to belong to my property was knocked down in the 80’s and the land mine used to be on belongs to them also. She also informed me she raised this with the seller’s solicitor a number of times.
This then dragged on and on with me just chasing the solicitor I had used. I was sent a copy of the schedule from when the neighbour upstairs had bought the property which states private front and back garden and the scullery. It was the same solicitor/estate agent that sold her place back 12/13 years ago that were now selling the property I purchased, my shiny schedule stated it comes with front and rear private gardens, no mention of the scullery. I was aware early doors that the rear garden belonged to them after checking with the solicitor I had instructed.
At the moment it seems more likely the scullery in question does belong to the upstairs property and a possibility a previous scullery has now been knocked down.
My title deeds show the date of first registration being 2/9/1998 and land certificate updated to 6/2/2006. This states –
Subjects 1 X Rd within the land edged red on the title plan, being the lower flat of building 2 and 1 X Road. Together with the scullery built out to the back of said flat but without any right to any ground other than a joint right with the proprietors of the upper flat 2 X road, aforsesaid to the solum of ground on which the said lower flat and scullery are built, and a right of access round the east end of said building to the back door into the said scullery’
*address made up but I am number 1 and neighbour is number 2
The title plan shows the two properties and the red mark is the same outline for my property and my neighbour. Can try and get a picture if of any use.
From what I understand the neighbours title deeds do not specifically mention the scullery.
The scullery was going to be used for my storage particularly useful for road bikes which I’m now keeping inside and car cleaning stuff etc. The flat itself does not much have storage.
The scullery was going to be used for my storage particularly useful for road bikes which I’m now keeping inside and car cleaning stuff etc. The flat itself does not much have storage.
I have since met my solicitor, for the first time in person a couple weeks ago, action has been taken in regards to a formal letter being sent to the seller solicitors for the full file to be reviewed and explanations to be given. I feel this is the steps we should be going in but I’m just wondering if anyone can advise on anything else I can do? Or next course of action? If any. I am tempted to seek independent legal advice, i.e. a fresh set of eyes but I’m aware this costs money which I don’t have given I have just bought my first house.
I feel the solicitor I have used provided a very poor service. Many other mistakes were made but this thread would turn into pages. I also feel the selling solicitor has advertised the property partly incorrectly, I have also recently found out that the selling solicitor was aware of previous disputes going on between the previous owner of my property and that of the neighbour. This wasn’t disclosed until after completion which I understand is a breach.
Encase it is asked the home report just mentions that the title deeds and land should be reviewed in more detail.
Any help/advice is appreciated and any other information I have possibly missed I can try and explain/provide.
0
Comments
-
I would wait to see what the reponse is.scotch_bonnet wrote: »I feel this is the steps we should be going in but I’m just wondering if anyone can advise on anything else I can do? Or next course of action?
What do you mean by "I understand is a breach"? Had they told you there hadn't been any disputes?I have also recently found out that the selling solicitor was aware of previous disputes going on between the previous owner of my property and that of the neighbour. This wasn’t disclosed until after completion which I understand is a breach.0 -
I would wait to see what the reponse is.
What do you mean by "I understand is a breach"? Had they told you there hadn't been any disputes?
This is correct, nothing was disclosed or mentioned until after I had moved in. From what I understand issues had been had for some time and my now up stairs neighbour had made the selling solicitor of my property aware of various issues when the house was put up for sale.0 -
Yes, but had they explicitly said there had been no disputes? They don't have any general obligation to disclose them, only not to give misleading answers if you ask the question. I don't think it's a standard question in the Home Report questionnaire, for example.scotch_bonnet wrote: »This is correct, nothing was disclosed or mentioned until after I had moved in.
Some of this will depend on what the missives ended up saying, particularly about the extent of the property.0 -
Yes, but had they explicitly said there had been no disputes? They don't have any general obligation to disclose them, only not to give misleading answers if you ask the question. I don't think it's a standard question in the Home Report questionnaire, for example.
Some of this will depend on what the missives ended up saying, particularly about the extent of the property.
Ah I see. Yes in the home report one part is the Property Questionnaire which is completed by the seller I believe, I have just checked and no question relates to this. I have a friend who has recently sold a flat who had to disclose if they were aware of anything, not sure if this was in the form of a questionnaire or via the solicitor they were using.
My solicitor has mentioned that they are in breach of clause nine of the Scottish Standard Clauses....different language to me!0 -
9DISPUTES/LITIGATION
9.1The Seller warrants that neither the Property nor the Seller’s title are affected by or are under consideration in any court proceedings or other litigation or are the subject of any dispute.
9.2There are no current disputes with neighbouring proprietors or occupiers or any other parties relating to access, title or common property.
https://www.lawscot.org.uk/media/361335/scottish-standard-clauses-client-guide-third-edition.pdf0 -
Well, your solicitor should have provided you with a copy of your offer (including those standard clauses) at the time, so sloppy practice if they didn't. But yes, if they accepted that condition then it would appear they ought to have disclosed the disputes (assuming they're relevant to what we're talking about).scotch_bonnet wrote: »My solicitor has mentioned that they are in breach of clause nine of the Scottish Standard Clauses....different language to me!0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 350.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.2K Spending & Discounts
- 243.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 597.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.6K Life & Family
- 256.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards