Un-salable cottage

Dimbo

Please can anyone tell me who to turn to? I got as far as signing my side of the conveyancing document for the sale of my late mother's cottage and sent it back to my solicitor. Meantime my solicitor had received a letter from another cottage owner in the terrace saying he wanted to store his stuff by a right/clause saying "to use the party washouse and tap for reasonable domestic purposes". I have rented out my cottage since my mother died so never lived in it. The other cottage owner has rented out his cottage since his parents died and has not lived in it while owning it. There is a shed in his cottage garden. He has chosen to install a washing machine in his cottage. The "washouse" is a 4ft x 8ft approx useable space dirty derelict low shed. The clause on my deed also says others had to contribute to maintenance which has never been offered and for the over 40 years I have known it has had no tap, no sink, nor water heating device.
Would it be possible for me to get this extinguished because he no longer can call it a Right of Need for the purpose it was intended?
Is he correct in saying the "reasonable domestic purposes" means he can store anything he likes in it without my permission? Who do I turn to to sort this out?

greatcrested

Wellyou've already instructed a solicitor for the sale,and that solicitor has access to all the deeds,conveyances, Title documents granting these rights/obligations. we don't.

So he is best placed to advise you.

But no, a right does not get extinguished just because it has not been used.

And long-lasting non-payment of maintenance costs is irrelevant if a) no maintenance has taken place and/or b) no demand for payment has ben made.

On the face of it, 'storage' does not seem to be in line with "to use the party washouse and tap for reasonable domestic purposes". But your soicitor will advise.

There is a shed in his cottage garden. He has chosen to install a washing machine in his cottage. The "washouse" is a 4ft x 8ft approx useable space dirty derelict low shed.

I'm unclear if this is one and the same shed.

* If the 'shed' in the neghbour's garden is not the 'washouse', then what is it's relevance?

* if the 'washouse' is the same as the shed in the neighbour's garden, then why is it of concern to you - you are selling your property, not the shed in the neighbour's garden.

davidmcn

The reasonable domestic purposes of a washhouse are to use it to do your laundry, I can't see that it would normally imply rights for storage (unless perhaps it's been used for such for a long enough time).
But if we're talking about a communal and derelict shed, how much does it really matter who's using it?

macman

Who supplies and pays for the water, electricity supply and drainage for this washing machine? A traditional wash-house might have drainage, but not the supply or power.

Salemicus

I don't understand why the existence of this neighbour's right makes your property unsaleable, or how you get from "reasonable domestic use" to "indefinite storage." But leaving that aside, there is a very easy way to get this right extinguished.
From the sound of it:

• Your neighbour is getting some minor storage from this right. Therefore it probably isn't worth much to him.
• Your neighbour having/exercising this right is making your house unsaleable. Therefore it's worth a lot to you.

An obvious solution presents itself. What would be a reasonable sum - a couple of grand?

NinjaTune

Where is the party wash house - is it sited in the grounds of your cottage?  If not then I don't understand what the issue is (except that potential buyers may not have space to store items in the "dirty derelict low shed").  I doubt that lack of storage space in a shared grubby ruin is enough to make the property unsaleable.

Dimbo

greatcrested said:

Wellyou've already instructed a solicitor for the sale,and that solicitor has access to all the deeds,conveyances, Title documents granting these rights/obligations. we don't.

So he is best placed to advise you.

But no, a right does not get extinguished just because it has not been used.

And long-lasting non-payment of maintenance costs is irrelevant if a) no maintenance has taken place and/or b) no demand for payment has ben made.

On the face of it, 'storage' does not seem to be in line with "to use the party washouse and tap for reasonable domestic purposes". But your soicitor will advise.

There is a shed in his cottage garden. He has chosen to install a washing machine in his cottage. The "washouse" is a 4ft x 8ft approx useable space dirty derelict low shed.

I'm unclear if this is one and the same shed.

* If the 'shed' in the neghbour's garden is not the 'washouse', then what is it's relevance?

* if the 'washouse' is the same as the shed in the neighbour's garden, then why is it of concern to you - you are selling your property, not the shed in the neighbour's garden.

Thank you for reading the post, greatcrested. I put in that the neighbour has his own shed in his garden so as to say he didn't really have any need to share mine nowadays. My solicitor said he will only deal with the conveyance not advise on a dispute.

greatcrested

Dimbo said:

greatcrested said:

Wellyou've already instructed a solicitor for the sale,and that solicitor has access to all the deeds,conveyances, Title documents granting these rights/obligations. we don't.

So he is best placed to advise you.

But no, a right does not get extinguished just because it has not been used.

And long-lasting non-payment of maintenance costs is irrelevant if a) no maintenance has taken place and/or b) no demand for payment has ben made.

On the face of it, 'storage' does not seem to be in line with "to use the party washouse and tap for reasonable domestic purposes". But your soicitor will advise.

There is a shed in his cottage garden. He has chosen to install a washing machine in his cottage. The "washouse" is a 4ft x 8ft approx useable space dirty derelict low shed.

I'm unclear if this is one and the same shed.

* If the 'shed' in the neghbour's garden is not the 'washouse', then what is it's relevance?

* if the 'washouse' is the same as the shed in the neighbour's garden, then why is it of concern to you - you are selling your property, not the shed in the neighbour's garden.

  My solicitor said he will only deal with the conveyance not advise on a dispute.

A strange approach. If the Deeds show a covenant that is releant or problematic, then advising you and helping resolve any issue is surely part of the process of conveyancing for that property.

Sure - if it developes into legal action over the dispute, that would be an unexpected 'extra', and possibly a conveyancing solicitor would not be best placed to see through a legal claim - but he should in that case recommend a colleague, or other firm, that specialises in litigation.

This is not by any chance a cheap online conveyancing warehouse? 20 unqualified admin clerks going through the standard box-ticking proces, overseen by a single Registered Conveyancer?

frogglet

Has the shared shed been cut off from being accessed by the other people who have rights to use It?
He may just be reminding everyone its a shared shed as the house is being sold. 
Is it close to your house? And him accessing it would be considered  to be intrusive or is it at the bottom of the garden?

Dimbo

frogglet said:

Has the shared shed been cut off from being accessed by the other people who have rights to use It?
He may just be reminding everyone its a shared shed as the house is being sold. 
Is it close to your house? And him accessing it would be considered  to be intrusive or is it at the bottom of the garden?

There is the access clause with it frogglet, it is a tiny postage-stamp garden and my gate is right by my only door. It is attached to my cottage. Yes it would be intrusive. My prospective buyer will pull out if the clause remains, as anyone would in this day and age?

greatcrested

Ah!

So the issue is not really the use the neighbour is making of the washouse, it is the presence of the clause giving him and others rights to use (though perhaps not for storage).

Getting the clause removed will depend on negotiation with and the agreement of (and possible payment to) all those with rights under the clause.

Getting the clause enforced (ie for washing purposes not storage) is completely different and might (eventually) involve litigation.