Un-salable cottage

Dimbo

greatcrested said:

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 develops 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?

No, it is a standard Solicitor's Partnership in the nearest town. My solicitor sent me the actual letter he had received from the neighbour who began it with "...further to our telephone conversation". I have no idea how the neighbour knew who my solicitor was but his letter addressed him in a familiar way. Just unfortunate I suppose that perhaps we both have the same solicitor??
My solicitor was aware of the awkward clause because I mentioned it in May when I first engaged him but I then took his advice that it didn't matter and would only need sorting if the buyer's solicitor questioned it.

Dimbo

NinjaTune said:

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.

Thank you NinjaTune. The washouse is attached to my cottage in my tiny fenced garden. My buyer, and previous people who have enquired about buying the cottage, do not want strangers in their garden. The neighbour/owner who claims "storage" rents his cottage out but lives miles away.

Dimbo

Salemicus said:

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?

My solicitor advises that I cannot get the clause removed from deeds. My buyer and other people who I have shown round the cottage will not buy it with the prospect of strangers wandering into the garden anytime to store, perhaps coal, booze, drugs, firewood, or whatever. The neighbour/owner doesn't live there but appears not to want to give up his claim, so I have to find someone who can tell me if he has a valid claim to "store"! He certainly can't do washing in it.

Dimbo

macman said:

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.

I'm really grateful for everybody's comments, macman. The washing machine is in the neighbour's kitchen. I have not been asked to provide for that! And I have no intention - and have never been asked - to get water and drainage and electricity installed in the washouse. It has no drainage, no tap, no sink, no way to heat water nor any sign that it ever has had. The clause also says maintenance of the washouse is to be shared but it obviously never has been because in this day and age everyone has water piped to their houses.

frogglet

Does he want to buy your house? It sounds like he's being awkward for a reason.
Is the shed that old , it may fall down.

princeofpounds

I agree with the others. The right is not extinguished by lapsed use or failure to pay maintenance. However, storage would not be reasonable domestic use consistent with a communal wash-house. Except storage of a reasonable amount of washing items, of course. The idea is that everyone with a right should be able to use it as a wash-house, not just him for his own exclusive purposes.

It's quite hard to get a term like this removed from your deeds by applying to court. It may have been possible if the wash-house no longer existed, but as it does exist and someone wants to use it... doesn't matter that he has his own machine and space elsewhere.

Before turning it into some kind of dispute, I would be tempted to get in touch and ask him what his thinking is. Make him understand - politely - that whilst you understand there is a right to use the wash-house and tap, remind him that storage is not an acceptable domestic use of a communal wash-house. Tell him you realise that the building is not functional, and that no-one has used it for years, so what is his basis for concern at this time? Is he just keen to remind everyone of the right? Is he keen to buy the property? Is he angling for the right to be bought out? You'll probably find his ulterior motive, and hopefully he isn't just nuts.

It's poor form for the solicitor to refuse to advise on issues like this, unless it's just a matter of paying for their time as it is of course not part of a standard conveyancing quote. At the very very least, they could refer you to a solicitor with sufficient expertise. If you are forced to drop the transaction for now, I would drop the solicitor too.

Honestly, the best outcome would probably be to buy the right out from him. Is he the only party with the right?

greatcrested

princeofpounds said:

Honestly, the best outcome would probably be to buy the right out from him. Is he the only party with the right?

I think OP said others also have this right (but am feeling too lazy to re-read the thread!)

frogglet

I  suspect originally it was near the well and had a heated dolly tub and a mangle it never needed a tap. Its a shame it never fell down.

sheramber

Is it only his house that has the right or do the owners of the other houses in the terrace hae the same right?

mobileron

Sounds like its time to remove a few bricks and watch it fall down,then get it condemmed