Should we accept offer to buy easement vs. compulsory purchase?

Doodlebugs

Advise the utilities company that you are getting an agent on board and that the agents reasonable fees are to be covered by them. You do not need to sign the HoTs to initiate that. There is some debate about what are ‘reasonable’ fees so you should be prepared to potentially pay some costs, as the contract with the agent ultimately lies with you. The RICS website is the best place to look for a local agent. You won’t need a solicitor on board until the terms and value are agreed. 

I think utilities work differently to government owned companies/local government that typically use CPOs, in that they can offer more than compensation code for the required works, so it may well be that their offer is more than you would get if they had to get a CPO approved. But that doesn’t mean it is the best value for you, always get advice! 

boots_babe

Heads of Terms are not legally binding, they are simply a written document outlining how the agreement will proceed in principle. Signing doesn't hold you to anything, the HoT will simply be used as a reference point from which to then construct the proper legal documents should matters progress. Even then changes can be made to what was originally in the HoT.

Bricks

Doodlebugs said:

Advise the utilities company that you are getting an agent on board and that the agents reasonable fees are to be covered by them. You do not need to sign the HoTs to initiate that. There is some debate about what are ‘reasonable’ fees so you should be prepared to potentially pay some costs, as the contract with the agent ultimately lies with you. The RICS website is the best place to look for a local agent. You won’t need a solicitor on board until the terms and value are agreed. 

I think utilities work differently to government owned companies/local government that typically use CPOs, in that they can offer more than compensation code for the required works, so it may well be that their offer is more than you would get if they had to get a CPO approved. But that doesn’t mean it is the best value for you, always get advice! 

What exactly is a "local agent" and what do they do, vs a solicitor? Are they basically surveyors who advise on what the value should be?

davidmcn

Bricks said:

Doodlebugs said:

Advise the utilities company that you are getting an agent on board and that the agents reasonable fees are to be covered by them. You do not need to sign the HoTs to initiate that. There is some debate about what are ‘reasonable’ fees so you should be prepared to potentially pay some costs, as the contract with the agent ultimately lies with you. The RICS website is the best place to look for a local agent. You won’t need a solicitor on board until the terms and value are agreed. 

I think utilities work differently to government owned companies/local government that typically use CPOs, in that they can offer more than compensation code for the required works, so it may well be that their offer is more than you would get if they had to get a CPO approved. But that doesn’t mean it is the best value for you, always get advice! 

What exactly is a "local agent" and what do they do, vs a solicitor? Are they basically surveyors who advise on what the value should be?

Yes, they just mean a surveyor. Solicitors aren't going to be able to advise on what price you ought to be seeking. 

Bricks

The utilities company told me that we would not have to pay the solicitors representing us in this.

Rather than us paying solicitors and then claiming costs back, they have said that their solicitors will provide an undertaking to ours that they will be paid on completion of the process, so no money needs to pass between us and our solicitors.

Having now been in touch with a solicitor's practice who are willing to represent us, I'm starting to wonder whether this is such a good idea. Their job is to act in our interests but their incentive to get paid is simply to complete the process. If we decided that we were not happy with them then it seems we'd have little leverage. Is this an ill-advised set-up? Or is it fairly normal?

davidmcn

Bricks said:

The utilities company told me that we would not have to pay the solicitors representing us in this.

Rather than us paying solicitors and then claiming costs back, they have said that their solicitors will provide an undertaking to ours that they will be paid on completion of the process, so no money needs to pass between us and our solicitors.

Having now been in touch with a solicitor's practice who are willing to represent us, I'm starting to wonder whether this is such a good idea. Their job is to act in our interests but their incentive to get paid is simply to complete the process. If we decided that we were not happy with them then it seems we'd have little leverage. Is this an ill-advised set-up? Or is it fairly normal?

It's normal. Though if you prefer, they can try to get an undertaking that your legal costs will be paid whether or not the transaction proceeds.

Bricks

davidmcn said:

Bricks said:

The utilities company told me that we would not have to pay the solicitors representing us in this.

Rather than us paying solicitors and then claiming costs back, they have said that their solicitors will provide an undertaking to ours that they will be paid on completion of the process, so no money needs to pass between us and our solicitors.

Having now been in touch with a solicitor's practice who are willing to represent us, I'm starting to wonder whether this is such a good idea. Their job is to act in our interests but their incentive to get paid is simply to complete the process. If we decided that we were not happy with them then it seems we'd have little leverage. Is this an ill-advised set-up? Or is it fairly normal?

It's normal. Though if you prefer, they can try to get an undertaking that your legal costs will be paid whether or not the transaction proceeds.

Thanks. I think I just want it to be clear in our agreement with the solicitors that any arguments about costs are for them to have with the utility co. rather than us. For example the agreement letter they want us to sign includes:

"You have advised that [utility co] will be paying our fees up to a limit on their fee scale"

This implies that they can try and bill us for fees that go over that limit.

I think it should say something like "[Utility co] have advised that they will pay all of our reasonable fees".

It also talks about sending us invoice on completion but surely the invoice should go to the utility co.

unforeseen

They probably have a fee scale based on experience of doing this quite often so are fully aware of the work that a solicitor is required to do and their scale of fees takes this into account.
A solicitor will argue that lots of unnecessary work is reasonable. 

Bricks

unforeseen said:

They probably have a fee scale based on experience of doing this quite often so are fully aware of the work that a solicitor is required to do and their scale of fees takes this into account.
A solicitor will argue that lots of unnecessary work is reasonable. 

I'd like it to be clear that they have to have that argument with the utility co rather than me.

davidmcn

Bricks said:

unforeseen said:

They probably have a fee scale based on experience of doing this quite often so are fully aware of the work that a solicitor is required to do and their scale of fees takes this into account.
A solicitor will argue that lots of unnecessary work is reasonable. 

I'd like it to be clear that they have to have that argument with the utility co rather than me.

Just discuss it with your solicitor, they'll be used to these sorts of negotiations.