Landownership

Kenyanscott1

Hi Everyone

We just bought our house, which is meant to be an exciting time - but its starting to turn into a bit of a nightmare and Im wondering if anyone can provide some advice before I take some next steps.

I seen the house on Countrywide - and there was a video clip, and as part of the videoclip there was a lovely grass garden section - and I just new my two boys would love playing there in the summer months.
I arranged a visit and as part of the visit I was told that the grass section was part of the property, there was a hut there, along with some wooden log sections that they had placed down there as well and it was all fenced off. I asked specifically if it was part of the property and I was informed that it was by the owner.
We were also left a lovely note by the previous owners confirming the keys for both huts - one of those huts is situated on that land.

So we purchased the house, we got the land registry information and I didn't study it in any great detail as I'm not an expert on these things and it looked to be what I thought was correct and didn't raise any concerns.

however, the day we moved in, one of the new neighbours came and spoke to me and had suggested that there had been some animosity in the past with the previous owners specifically due to that part of land, as the belief was that it was actually council land that they had fenced off, and put the hut it and didn't have any ownership of it.

I received the confirmation of our land registry completion yesterday and upon further and closer inspection - the boundary that is set out - looks different to the land set out - and doesn't follow the fence lines that we have - and I'm not concerned I've bought the house based on a lie , and we will need to remove the fencing, remove the hut, and my dream of the kids playing there will be dead.

I suppose my question is - do I have any recourse from either Countrywide for mis-advertising - they shouldn't have had that land in the video suggesting it was part of the property if it wasnt.
And do I have any recourse with the previous owners who have misled us into believing that the land was part of the property?

user1977

Maybe the sellers also thought they owned the land? The time for you to check this was during the conveyancing process, that's why your solicitor normally sends you the plans to check - because you've visited the property and know what you're expecting to buy, and your solicitor doesn't.

propertyrental

Kenyanscott1 said:

Hi Everyone

........

So we purchased the house, we got the land registry information and I didn't study it in any great detail as I'm not an expert on these things and it looked to be what I thought was correct and didn't raise any concerns.
You would have got the land registry information during the purchasing process and before you purchased.

Your solicitor would have asked you to review the title plan and compare it to what you had seen. Remember, you viewed the property in person, your conveyancer never did. That was your time to highlight if the Title Plan of what you were purchasing was different to what you'd seen (ie the area with the huts was not included in the Plan)

however, the day we moved in, one of the new neighbours came and spoke to me and had suggested that there had been some animosity in the past with the previous owners specifically due to that part of land, as the belief was that it was actually council land that they had fenced off, and put the hut it and didn't have any ownership of it.

I received the confirmation of our land registry completion yesterday and upon further and closer inspection - the boundary that is set out - looks different to the land set out - and doesn't follow the fence lines that we have - and I'm not concerned I've bought the house based on a lie , and we will need to remove the fencing, remove the hut, and my dream of the kids playing there will be dead.
I'm afraid the fault is yours. You purchased what is on the title plan.

I suppose my question is - do I have any recourse from either Countrywide for mis-advertising - they shouldn't have had that land in the video suggesting it was part of the property if it wasnt.
They are reliant on what the sellers tell them. That's why you have a lawyer to check things ... with your cooperation and agreement.

And do I have any recourse with the previous owners who have misled us into believing that the land was part of the property?
What statements did they make, in writing (if any) to you as part of the contract or related documents eg in the fixtures and fittings form? Please quote.

If the council are not aware, and not using the land, you may be able to claim 'adverse possession, either after 10 years or less if your sellers supply a 'Statement of Truth' confirming how long they used the land.

But not easy.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/adverse-possession-of-1-unregistered-land-and-2-registered-land/practice-guide-5-adverse-possession-of-1-unregistered-and-2-registered-land-where-a-right-to-be-registered-was-acquired-before-13-october-2003

Kenyanscott1

propertyrental said:

Kenyanscott1 said:

Hi Everyone

........

So we purchased the house, we got the land registry information and I didn't study it in any great detail as I'm not an expert on these things and it looked to be what I thought was correct and didn't raise any concerns.
You would have got the land registry information during the purchasing process and before you purchased.

Your solicitor would have asked you to review the teitle plan and compare it to what you had seen. Remember, you viewed the property in person, your conveyancer never did. That was you time to highlight if the Title Planof what you were purchaing was dfferent to what you'd seen (ie the area with the huts was not included in the Plan)

however, the day we moved in, one of the new neighbours came and spoke to me and had suggested that there had been some animosity in the past with the previous owners specifically due to that part of land, as the belief was that it was actually council land that they had fenced off, and put the hut it and didn't have any ownership of it.

I received the confirmation of our land registry completion yesterday and upon further and closer inspection - the boundary that is set out - looks different to the land set out - and doesn't follow the fence lines that we have - and I'm not concerned I've bought the house based on a lie , and we will need to remove the fencing, remove the hut, and my dream of the kids playing there will be dead.
I'm afraid the fault is yours. You purchased what is on the title plan.

I suppose my question is - do I have any recourse from either Countrywide for mis-advertising - they shouldn't have had that land in the video suggesting it was part of the property if it wasnt.
They are reliant on what the sellers tell them. That's why you have a lawyer to check things ... with your cooperation and agreement.

And do I have any recourse with the previous owners who have misled us into believing that the land was part of the property?
What statements did they make, in writiing (if any) to you as part of the contract or related documents eg in the fixtures and fittings form? Please quote.

If the council are not aware, and not using the land, you may be able to claim 'adverse possessio, either after 10 years or less if your sellers supply a 'Statement of Truth' confirming how long they used the land.

But not easy.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/adverse-possession-of-1-unregistered-land-and-2-registered-land/practice-guide-5-adverse-possession-of-1-unregistered-and-2-registered-land-where-a-right-to-be-registered-was-acquired-before-13-october-2003

hi they lived in the property for 27 years before selling.  

propertyrental

Kenyanscott1 said:

propertyrental said:

Kenyanscott1 said:

Hi Everyone

........

So we purchased the house, we got the land registry information and I didn't study it in any great detail as I'm not an expert on these things and it looked to be what I thought was correct and didn't raise any concerns.
You would have got the land registry information during the purchasing process and before you purchased.

Your solicitor would have asked you to review the teitle plan and compare it to what you had seen. Remember, you viewed the property in person, your conveyancer never did. That was you time to highlight if the Title Planof what you were purchaing was dfferent to what you'd seen (ie the area with the huts was not included in the Plan)

however, the day we moved in, one of the new neighbours came and spoke to me and had suggested that there had been some animosity in the past with the previous owners specifically due to that part of land, as the belief was that it was actually council land that they had fenced off, and put the hut it and didn't have any ownership of it.

I received the confirmation of our land registry completion yesterday and upon further and closer inspection - the boundary that is set out - looks different to the land set out - and doesn't follow the fence lines that we have - and I'm not concerned I've bought the house based on a lie , and we will need to remove the fencing, remove the hut, and my dream of the kids playing there will be dead.
I'm afraid the fault is yours. You purchased what is on the title plan.

I suppose my question is - do I have any recourse from either Countrywide for mis-advertising - they shouldn't have had that land in the video suggesting it was part of the property if it wasnt.
They are reliant on what the sellers tell them. That's why you have a lawyer to check things ... with your cooperation and agreement.

And do I have any recourse with the previous owners who have misled us into believing that the land was part of the property?
What statements did they make, in writiing (if any) to you as part of the contract or related documents eg in the fixtures and fittings form? Please quote.

If the council are not aware, and not using the land, you may be able to claim 'adverse possessio, either after 10 years or less if your sellers supply a 'Statement of Truth' confirming how long they used the land.

But not easy.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/adverse-possession-of-1-unregistered-land-and-2-registered-land/practice-guide-5-adverse-possession-of-1-unregistered-and-2-registered-land-where-a-right-to-be-registered-was-acquired-before-13-october-2003

hi they lived in the property for 27 years before selling.  

Great. And will they cooperate by providing a suitable 'Statement of Truth' as to how they used the land in question?

Have you read the link?

housebuyer143

Is the land registered to the council? Have you checked with the land registry? 
If it's unregistered you shouldn't have any issues if you can get the old owner to provide a statement of truth they have used it exclusively for the past 12 years.

If it's registered the council are likely to be notified if you tried to claim it and they will likely refuse you to have it. You could always ask to purchase the land from the council?

Kenyanscott1

housebuyer143 said:

Is the land registered to the council? Have you checked with the land registry? 
If it's unregistered you shouldn't have any issues if you can get the old owner to provide a statement of truth they have used it exclusively for the past 12 years.

If it's registered the council are likely to be notified if you tried to claim it and they will likely refuse you to have it. You could always ask to purchase the land from the council?

Hi at the moment I don't know who owns it.

We are in Scotland so I don't know if that makes a difference.

what I do know is that the previous owners lived here for 27 years until last week, and it was a bone of contention from the neighbours that they had the land and used it - with the belief they just claimed it which now appears to be the case.

user1977

Kenyanscott1 said:

housebuyer143 said:

Is the land registered to the council? Have you checked with the land registry? 
If it's unregistered you shouldn't have any issues if you can get the old owner to provide a statement of truth they have used it exclusively for the past 12 years.

If it's registered the council are likely to be notified if you tried to claim it and they will likely refuse you to have it. You could always ask to purchase the land from the council?

Hi at the moment I don't know who owns it.

We are in Scotland so I don't know if that makes a difference.

Scotland means that adverse possession works completely differently from England (which is where people on this forum tend to assume you are unless you shout about it, and sometimes even if you do...) so no, your sellers won't have acquired any rights without first registering title. But if they've occupied it for 27 years then it's safe to say it's land which the true owners don't care much about.

Talk to your solicitor anyway and check you've interpreted things correctly and who owns the land (always possible it was actually owned by the sellers but on a separate title)..