Misled by new house builder help needed

pinkteapot

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Hopefully the OP will return with some further information. As the neighbour appears to be "claiming exclusivity" not has. One assumes that the neighbour's title is likewise flawed.

Not if the path is on the neighbour's land. If that's the case, and the neighbour's title has no easement giving OP's daughter's house a right of way over it, then it's simply part of their land and only they can use it. In this instance they'd have to accept a variation to their title granting another property a right of way over that path. And a variation to the title should be run past their mortgage lender.

PasturesNew

As others have said, there is no claim to pursue.

The neighbour won't give up access to that path - that's theirs and it's staying theirs. They could've even bought it because it was their path without others having rights, now they've been informed it's solely theirs they'd be in no hurry to allow any access.... indeed, as a house buyer looking I refuse to view new builds with these shared paths/accesses due to past observations of what happens on such paths....

pinkteapot

PasturesNew wrote: »

The neighbour won't give up access to that path - that's theirs and it's staying theirs. They could've even bought it because it was their path without others having rights, now they've been informed it's solely theirs they'd be in no hurry to allow any access.... indeed, as a house buyer looking I refuse to view new builds with these shared paths/accesses due to past observations of what happens on such paths....

I'm more cynical - assuming OP's house was already planned when the neighbour's was built, it should have been patently obvious from the site plan that the path led to both houses. I'm thinking developer c*ck-up and the neighbour will be asking for a tidy lump sum to amend their title.

If the idea to have the path also lead to a second house came later then the developer would surely have asked the neighbour before building the house.

PasturesNew

pinkteapot wrote: »

....developer c*ck-up and the neighbour will be asking for a tidy lump sum to amend their title.

It'd take a fortune for me to accept cash to change it - and I'd only do it when I were considering selling.

From new, there'd be no price difference.... but I'd be ransoming it for a 10-15% value of the house cash bonus to hand it over ... and only if I were considering selling myself.

No money while I lived there would be considered by me .... none. I could be persuaded to sell the house back to the developer so they could change it, I'd want 20%+ more than I paid for the inconvenience... enough cash persuasion to consider me moving out.

My path, not yours, tough t1tty.....

I'd want sufficient cash extra to not feel I'd lost out; I'd want a betterment of my living standards... to be able to buy a slightly better house than the one I'd happily bought and was enjoying.

Until then though, I'd feel annoyed every time anybody used that path to get to next door... postman, deliveries, takeaway deliveries, friends, family, agents, all visitors and door knockers... and if the path were now "defendable" I'd be putting up a bush/fence.

AdrianC

There is one solution that may be possible, depending on layout...

Build a second path, for the "land-locked" property...

Blockhead77

Thanks all, I'm overwhelmed with all your responses. A further update, the exclusivity to the communal path only came to light when the developers started to erect a wall at the front of the property. Previously it had been the showhouse and access was permitted off the main road, however once completed access was to via the communal path (as per the agreed council plans) When the neighbouring plot realised the wall was going up they started to make it known that they had exclusivity and even put a large pot plant between the two plots (they had already moved in June/July) it now transpires that they had asked for exclusivity to the path for privacy reasons and incredibly the builders or builders solicitors agreed to it. So no our solicitor hadn't picked up on it, but they have waived fees but are holding out for disbursements. In the meantime daughter has put deposit down elsewhere.

davidmcn

Blockhead77 wrote: »

So no our solicitor hadn't picked up on it, but they have waived fees but are holding out for disbursements.

It's not clear from your description that they ought to have picked up on it any earlier than they did. Really depends what was disclosed to them about the route of the path and what had been agreed with the neighbour. Your solicitor wouldn't normally see the agreed deeds for neighbouring plot sales (unless they had already completed registration).

Disbursements may properly have been incurred before title is examined anyway, that's the risk you take.

AnotherJoe

PasturesNew wrote: »

As others have said, there is no claim to pursue.

Why ever not? The builder has made a massive mistake that makes a purchase effectively impossible. Therefore they should therefore be liable, since its their mistake, for any costs incurred up to that point .
What grounds woudl you think they have to defend non payment of legal and similar costs (there's also the lenders survey and no doubt other costs)

kirtondm

Presumbly as no contracts have been exhcanged

PasturesNew

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Why ever not? ...

kirtondm wrote: »

Presumbly as no contracts have been exhcanged

This ↑

Until exchange it's up to the buyer to discover problems.
Fair or unfair, that's the way it is.

After that it's pure luck if a developer cares enough to do something to change the situation or reimburse.