18mo after moving into new build, told our garden fence temporary, will now lose 31.5msq

lincroft1710

davidmcn said:

lincroft1710 said:

Oh for the days when there were house deeds which gave precise plot measurements of which I used to see plenty decades ago, "frontage to Dispute Street 34 ft 7ins, length on eastern side 153 ft 2 in, length on western side 146 ft 8 in, distance from SE corner of plot to SW corner of plot 37 ft 4 in". 

Yes, there can be precise measurements of the dimensions of the plot. But that just leaves you with a "floating box" unless you know what you're "anchoring" it to, which tends to be where the GPS coordinates come into it.

I purposely didn't include all info which would appear on the deeds, but it would have enough to precisely "anchor" it on Dispute Street, e,g. reference to existing buildings or established boundaries etc. We had to do valuations for (I think) stamp duty and often had to identify the title deed with an OS plan or postal address.

GPS co-ordinates?? The time I'm referring to was at about 5/10 years before our offices even had a most basic computer which only had a single application

moneymattersnatter

I agree. 
I think option 3 might be the problem... these are the last two houses to be built of HUNDREDS. 😳
They are designed and shoehorned in and (I understand) will have minimal width for access and pavements, so they're running low on options to displace. But... one of the spaces is GRASS! I just don't fully understand why they're troubling us with this? 

AdrianC

moneymattersnatter said:

I agree. 
I think option 3 might be the problem... these are the last two houses to be built of HUNDREDS. 😳
They are designed and shoehorned in and (I understand) will have minimal width for access and pavements, so they're running low on options to displace. But... one of the spaces is GRASS! I just don't fully understand why they're troubling us with this? 

Because developer A think developer R built over the dividing line onto their land...

What developer A would do if it was just a question of their land, between their plots, is a different question...

moneymattersnatter

frogglet said:

It looks like you have propped up tons of soil using a wooden fence, next to your neighbours gardens . What will you do when the wood rots and there is the amount of rain we have just had? 
However it seems you have a back up plan, good on you.

I'm sorry I missed this yesterday.  It might not be evident form the photos but the land at the back of our property is the same height as the neighbours behind us.  But you're right on the soon-to-be neighbours (when they're no longer cars!) I hadn't thought of that! Eek!

moneymattersnatter

Please can I put a bump on this question: 
I'm anticipating a defence; "we wanted to give you the best fence for security and aesthetic reasons, even if only temporarily.  The fact the posts are concreted in doesn't mean anything. We now need to build on the tarmac.  Everything is temporary until we change it...."  I checked today and they use the same quality fence to 'hide' the car park and two huge cement towers. 

Can anyone comment on whether this might be a reasonable defence? 

anteguardian

moneymattersnatter said:

Please can I put a bump on this question: 
I'm anticipating a defence; "we wanted to give you the best fence for security and aesthetic reasons, even if only temporarily.  The fact the posts are concreted in doesn't mean anything. We now need to build on the tarmac.  Everything is temporary until we change it...."  I checked today and they use the same quality fence to 'hide' the car park and two huge cement towers. 

Can anyone comment on whether this might be a reasonable defence? 

If at no point they’ve explained the the fence is temporary then it isn’t in my mind. Would they turn around and say that about your bricks and mortar house too? “Everything is temporary until we change it...” No, I don’t think so.
You’ve bought it and moved in now... too late for them to change anything without your permission.

just because they are saying it was temporary doesn’t mean that’s the case - you’ve already explained there’s nothing noted down or said to you previously that would give you the indication that that is the case. 

mrschaucer

Which developer put in the "temporary" fence?  Yours?  How can you have the rule of "caveat emptor" if someone can come along years later and tell you that actually they didn't mean to sell you what you bought ... 

moneymattersnatter

😂 My husband has come home today all sleuth-like. I'll see if I can detail his logic. There are two stories being spun here: 
- The fence has ALWAYS been temporary, it's just someone forgot to tell us
- Therefore, the fence has ALWAYS been in the wrong place, they just forgot to tell us. 
- So they both KNEW that the fence would need to be moved and have all the paperwork between the developers to demonstrate when these works would be undertaken, by whom. 
- So there is an audit trail of this *not* error in placement, but omission to explain to us what they'd BOTH already planned. 

BUT
- Why is it only coming to our attention now, when we all *should* have known that it was temporary?
- Why did they need to come out to measure up on Tuesday, before breaking the news? 

Legally, I reckon they may be digging themselves a bit of a hole here...  
I hope it doesn't out me, but I used to work for a large engineering firm but in a business operations function. I have no engineering experience, but customer complaints necessitated I would have to marry up site dimensions with regulation orders. Some of them were decades old, so thanks to those referring to the "30m south from the north-eastern point of x, for a distance of y"... It takes me back!
This is where I'm confused.  We had project managers to implement works on site, contractors to deliver and then someone would check and sign the works off against the plans.  HOW DID THIS GO SO WRONG?! 

ciderboy2009

My personal opinion.

There are two possible outcomes:

1. Developer A has to alter the plans including planning changes etc - possibly with Developer R bunging them a few £ for the land they "stole".

2. They move the fence and take the land from the OP - bunging the OP a few £ for the inconvenience.

At the end of the day, as with anything regarding developers nowadays, it will all be about money.  In this case, how much each of the options will cost.  The meeting was probably so they could get an indication as to how much of a pushover the OP would be (ie: how cheap they could make it).

Therefore the OP needs to make the land-grab option unattractive with regards to cost - the very least I would be asking for is the cost of re-instatement of the garden (work to be done by the OP's landscaper), all legal costs (including surveyors fees, any fees from the mortgage company etc) and a decent sum for the inconvenience.

Personally I would be getting ready to contact the local press - this is the sort of story that they love (and the developers hate)!

daveyjp

I'd be asking in writing for the information they are relying on which has led them to this conclusion.

No further discussion until it is received.