Adverse possession

catshark88

Swasterix said:

Newthings said:

Tigertailor said:

I think you were a little silly to not tie up the adverse possession in your purchase actually, it would not have slowed down your sale.(it didn't for us) And the conveyancer could have highlighted this better for you perhaps.

We had similar but was a piece of land unregistered within our title. We had this tied into the purchase and all work to acquire it happened after the sale but the prev owners had to apply for the adverse possession, with affidavits etc from themselves and previous owners to them, to prove it was used as part of their land. 9 months later we had the title. I would go back to your conveyance and see if there is anything that can be done.

I believe there is still the ability to apply for a historic adverse possession from the previous owners but you will need to look at the adverse possession yourself with a clear unbiased head. Also, from recollection, an adverse possession does not 'die' with a successive owner, it is the land that is 'possessed for 10 years'(since the 2002 Act)and can be shown to be (by being fenced) and without permission which seems as though you can.

Thanks, that's the advice given by Conveyancers. 

It wasn't a silly move...we were rushed due to stamp duty otherwise we would of had this sorted. It can take months/ years. 

I’m sorry but it was a silly move. In your haste to save £x in stamp duty, you’ve likely lost xm2 of land and £x from the value of the property. 

I suspect there will be a lot of legal cases resulting from 'silly moves', in the near future. People have been so desperate to save a few thousand quid of stamp duty that they have done insufficient due diligence.

Newthings

Thanks everyone.

I understand the "silly move comments" but this wasn't to save a couple of quid. It was to save a substantial amount on the stamp duty. 

I've had some good advice from some chartered surveyors which looks promising so I'll let you know the outcome later in the year.

Ally_E.

Good luck, would be nice to hear an update when you get this sorted.

ciderboy2009

OP - before you spend too much money on this I would suggest that you pop over to the Garden Law forums.

It sounds to me like any claim for adverse possession is bound to fail as the actual land owners had allowed the previous owners to use the land rather than the previous owners just taking it so adverse possesion is not an option.

london21

Newthings said:

I hope I can get some guidance!
Hi
3 weeks before purchasing a house, the estate agent had informed us that 6m of the back garden was going to be removed. The property developer at the back wanted it angled  so in line with the title plans after 45 years. The vendors gave a verbal agreement to the property developer but nothing captured in writing.

(Backgound info:
The previous owners had fence panelling which ran straight across the garden since 97', which is not shown on the title deeds but they have a lot of evidence to show its been untouched since they bought they property. They previous owners explained it had been squared of before they even bought the property so a total of 45 years).

I spoke to my solicitor who explained about adverse possession and how we could go through the rigmarole of getting this sorted. I contacted the estate agents to ask the vendors not to amend the garden and we would take on the issue when we purchased it. They vendors agreed and we continued with the purchase.

We bought the house a couple of days ago and yet to officially move in. To our horror we were informed by our neighbour that someone had chainsawed the back fence off. We called 101- the police took details, we fixed the panel and added signage to explain the police had been notified.

Yesterday our neighbour alerted us that three men with tools were ripping off our entire back garden panelling. I called the police and quickly rushed with my mother to the house. The property developer explained there was an agreement with the previous owner to amend the garden and he has every right to amend the fence as it was on his land. 

We explained to the police we had not been notified of any work being carried out. The officer asked for the most recent title plans, he took a look at then and agreed with the property developer to adjust the garden. 

We were absolutely shocked. I said to the officer that even though the title plans reflect this it doesn't mean they are the most up to date or accurate. Thats even explained on gov.uk. Police said we couldn't tear it down and if we did we would be charged with criminal damage. I said this needed to be settled between our solicitors but the police weren't listening.

I dread to think if me or my mum were in the house by ourselves when this happened. My mum is a frail lady and I know this would of been enough to give her heart attack.

The previous owners got in contact and are filling in an adverse possession form. They explained they hadn't told the property developers that they weren't continuing with the garden amendment at the time as the sale of the house went through so quickly. 

Any advice on the situation.

I feel like I need to make a complaint to the police.

Oh no, if just verbal agreement that won’t carry much weight. The title plan is the key legal document. 

the seller are dodgy. 

AdrianC

Newthings said:

I understand the "silly move comments" but this wasn't to save a couple of quid. It was to save a substantial amount on the stamp duty. 

How much was the SDLT saving?
How much would the difference in value of the property be with and without that bit of garden?

Newthings

Just an update, so the actual land title and boundaries show that our fence was in the right position, the property developers have determined that their interpretation of the boundary fence should include our garden. So bear in mind it has been like so for 45 years. After a lot of research they even showed to have incorporated our original boundary in their plans. It was only 2 years ago they decided to transfer the land and are finalising it now which is why they were so desperate to claim what they think is rightfully theirs...hence why they ripped our fence off and cut into our decking ( yes they chainsawed the decking the fexking eejiots). The previous owners and our neighbours are going to do an affidavit if needed but within my APossesion submission I included  20 plans showing out boundary line was correct and the land registry shows this too! 

I do understand why people think it's silly to rush and proceed with the purchase but you don't know the circumstances of why we were desperate to move and save money.

Thanks to all those who have provided useful advice!

princeofpounds

Newthings said:

Just an update, so the actual land title and boundaries show that our fence was in the right position, the property developers have determined that their interpretation of the boundary fence should include our garden. So bear in mind it has been like so for 45 years. After a lot of research they even showed to have incorporated our original boundary in their plans. It was only 2 years ago they decided to transfer the land and are finalising it now which is why they were so desperate to claim what they think is rightfully theirs...hence why they ripped our fence off and cut into our decking ( yes they chainsawed the decking the fexking eejiots). The previous owners and our neighbours are going to do an affidavit if needed but within my APossesion submission I included  20 plans showing out boundary line was correct and the land registry shows this too! 

I do understand why people think it's silly to rush and proceed with the purchase but you don't know the circumstances of why we were desperate to move and save money.

Thanks to all those who have provided useful advice!

I wasn't involved on the original thread but thanks for the update - they are very useful for the forum and people looking for assistance in future.

I was reading through a bunch of the posts and I thought some of it was rather hasty - not necessarily incorrect but there hadn't been enough questioning of the context.

For example, for the adverse possession claim to succeed, a couple of things were important (amongst others). One was that the land was not occupied with permission. The other is that it would have made a bid difference if the claim were eligible for the pre-2003 system of adverse possession or the post-2003 system (where it is much easier for a registered owner to recover land late in the process as long as they act when they are notified). Given what you say about the timescale, it would likely have been the former.

Of course it's now all rather irrelevant given that it seems the actual title plans appear to be in your favour all along (Which I don't think anyone on the thread would have been working from given the way the problem was initially presented).

Really hope it all gets ironed out in your favour, all the best.

newsgroupmonkey_

Newthings said:

Just an update, so the actual land title and boundaries show that our fence was in the right position, the property developers have determined that their interpretation of the boundary fence should include our garden. So bear in mind it has been like so for 45 years. After a lot of research they even showed to have incorporated our original boundary in their plans. It was only 2 years ago they decided to transfer the land and are finalising it now which is why they were so desperate to claim what they think is rightfully theirs...hence why they ripped our fence off and cut into our decking ( yes they chainsawed the decking the fexking eejiots). The previous owners and our neighbours are going to do an affidavit if needed but within my APossesion submission I included  20 plans showing out boundary line was correct and the land registry shows this too! 

I do understand why people think it's silly to rush and proceed with the purchase but you don't know the circumstances of why we were desperate to move and save money.

Thanks to all those who have provided useful advice!

Out of interest, now it's all been proven that you were in the right, are the developers putting right? After all, as the Police pointed out, it's criminal damage (play that card back at them!)