Buying House that has Breached Restrictive Covenenants and Easements

RS2OOO

Hello,

I have asked my conveyancer these questions and she has responded stating her superior will need to help her answer them and can't do so for a few days due to workload (stamp duty deadline).

However in view of the fact I have an expensive survey booked for Friday which might end up being a complete waste of money, I want to ask if anyone on here can share experience on the likely outcome of this situation.

The land / plot around the 1970's house I'm buying has an easement allowing the electricity board access to maintain and repair electricity cables running through the plot to/from a nearby substation. The cables are not physically attached to the house in any way or supply to the house.

Additionally a restrictive covenant in place from when the property was originally built forbids building within 1.5m of where the cables are situated so as not to impair access to the cables.

The current owners extended the house and built an outbuilding 20 years ago, both of which are straight over the top of where these cables run through.

Does anyone know if scenarios like this are common and can be resolved through the vendor taking an indemnity insurance cover that would go as far as to cover all losses including the demolition and rebuild costs if access was needed under the property by the electricity company, or insurance that would cover the cost of the cable being re-routed around the extension and outbuilding were a fault to occur within the section of cable(s) directly beneath the house/outbuilding?

Thank you for reading.

user1977

Yes, I expect indemnity cover would be available.

TripleH

How well maintained is the substation?

I assume it has been visited since the extension was built?

Have you raised this query with the vendors and checked that the building work has all been signed off properly?

It might be that they have permission or got it when they did their building work or it might be that no paperwork was done?

RS2OOO

user1977 said:

Yes, I expect indemnity cover would be available.

Thank you.

RS2OOO

TripleH said:

1) How well maintained is the substation?

2) I assume it has been visited since the extension was built?

3) Have you raised this query with the vendors and checked that the building work has all been signed off properly?

4) It might be that they have permission or got it when they did their building work or it might be that no paperwork was done?

1) Looks quite well maintained. It is in someone elses back garden on another street and visible from the street behind wire fencing. Not relevent to me but the people who's garden it is in I suspect have also breached their covenant as they've built a shed against the fence surrounding the substation.

2) No idea.

3) Conveyancer to investigate this - but the more info I can find beforehand the less costs incurred if this house becomes unmortgage-able. The building work was signed off by Building Control, but who knows whether the cables were deeper than the foundations or whether they were known about during the work - The covenants were not an easy read so there's every chance the current vendor didn't read or know about them. The Conveyancer didn't spot the issue either (as she wouldn't have known exact location of extension or outbuilding in relation to the affected area covered by the covenant).

4) I will know the answer to that soon, but not before spending almost £1000 on the survey unfortunately.

RS2OOO

The Searches come back this morning, part of which included an Energy and Transportation search.

The search has not identified any Energy Infrastructure near the property. (Only a power station and substation within 5km).

Based on the Deeds clearly showing electricity cables running through the site I would suspect the search is wrong or doesn't extend to identifying  HV / MV Cable locations, and I don't know enough about searches to know their likely accuracy.

Chandler85

Given the cables must be deep given that the foundations of the extension didn't affect them.  Is it not worth trying to get the National Grid to double check there existence, I don't think most power cables show on searches (though maybe I just don't remember mine)

The building itself is fine if signed off, but that doesn't mean someone isn't going to want to dig it all up to deal with a cable in the future, and I'm not sure how the indemnity would solve it, it would stop legal issues, but if it was "garden" as such, then National grid would probably put it back as it.  If suddenly they are digging up the kitchen due to the breach, would they put it back?  Or would an indemnity cover that cost?

user1977

RS2OOO said:

Based on the Deeds clearly showing electricity cables running through the site I would suspect the search is wrong or doesn't extend to identifying HV / MV Cable locations

It (probably) doesn't. Read the search more carefully, it tells you what it's actually checking for. You can get searches for cable/pipe routes from the relevant utilities.

user1977

Chandler85 said:

If suddenly they are digging up the kitchen due to the breach, would they put it back?  Or would an indemnity cover that cost?

It should cover the cost. And as suggested in the OP, if it's a serious problem with the cable it may be simpler just to lay a diversion rather than dig up along the original route.

RS2OOO

user1977 said:

RS2OOO said:

Based on the Deeds clearly showing electricity cables running through the site I would suspect the search is wrong or doesn't extend to identifying HV / MV Cable locations

It (probably) doesn't. Read the search more carefully, it tells you what it's actually checking for. You can get searches for cable/pipe routes from the relevant utilities.

As for reading searches, there are plenty of disclaimers so I suspect the data wasn't available to them.
The report does specifically state;
"Energy Infrastructure - Not Identified".
"Energy Transmission Lines - Not Identified."

Appreciate your answers @user1977 and grateful for them.
Certainly a positive that an indemnity cover may exist, at least the purchase for now remains viable and that goes someway to reassuring me I'm not about to throw money away continuing with the survey.

My wife did raise one point - Indemnity policy or not, lets say we go on holiday and suddenly the town gets a power cut, the source of which is under our house/outbuilding, and we come home to find parts of the house demolished and our belongings unsecured. Must be more chance of getting struck by lightening, but still a sobering thought.

user1977

RS2OOO said:

user1977 said:

RS2OOO said:

Based on the Deeds clearly showing electricity cables running through the site I would suspect the search is wrong or doesn't extend to identifying HV / MV Cable locations

It (probably) doesn't. Read the search more carefully, it tells you what it's actually checking for. You can get searches for cable/pipe routes from the relevant utilities.

The report does specifically state;
"Energy Transmission Lines - Not Identified."

Usually a distinction between "transmission" and "distribution" lines - transmission lines being big ones, basically. Unless it's a massive substation, the lines are going to be distribution ones.