Buyers solicitor asking us to pay Indemnity Insurance

WIAWSNB

Section62 said:

WIAWSNB said:

Hi Hb.
As said, indemnity policies are often a quick fix to overcome potential future issues. It sounds, in your case, that there's nigh-on zero chance the driveway or footpath ever being questioned in future, so the policies should be pretty cheap, and worth doing to move the sale on.
What should be mentioned, tho', is that you shouldn't also take any action to investigate or question these two situations with, say, Highways or Planning, as to make them 'aware' of a potential issue could void the policy.
If, in the extremely unlikely event that you enquired and, as a result, we're told you had no right of access over that footpath, the policy would not protect you 'cos it was your fault they found out; you'd be mightily stuffed :-)
So, take them out, and shhhhh.
(Unless you wish to research surreptitiously, in which case fill your boots.)

There's not enough information to conclude that...

It doesn't actually matter, does it - they will be indemnified... 

BungalowBel

We ended up with four indemnity policies, all paid for by us.

We'd had new doors installed before you needed a FENSA Certificate, therefore we hadn't got one.

Same with the boiler, before you needed any certification, although we had had it serviced.

One was for our creeping freehold (next door's bedrooms over our entry).

Can't remember what the forth one was for - rewiring I think.

We did actually have  HETAS Certificate for the logburner. 

Cost a few hundred, iirc.

So I think if you want your sale/purchase to complete, just hold your nose and pay it.

Section62

WIAWSNB said:

Section62 said:

WIAWSNB said:

Hi Hb.
As said, indemnity policies are often a quick fix to overcome potential future issues. It sounds, in your case, that there's nigh-on zero chance the driveway or footpath ever being questioned in future, so the policies should be pretty cheap, and worth doing to move the sale on.
What should be mentioned, tho', is that you shouldn't also take any action to investigate or question these two situations with, say, Highways or Planning, as to make them 'aware' of a potential issue could void the policy.
If, in the extremely unlikely event that you enquired and, as a result, we're told you had no right of access over that footpath, the policy would not protect you 'cos it was your fault they found out; you'd be mightily stuffed :-)
So, take them out, and shhhhh.
(Unless you wish to research surreptitiously, in which case fill your boots.)

There's not enough information to conclude that...

It doesn't actually matter, does it - they will be indemnified... 

I should have bolded the "so the policies should be pretty cheap" as well...

That was the point, that there is likely to be a significant cost difference between a policy covering a low risk (e.g. planning enforcement which is timed out) vs the higher risk of someone else owning the land with the OP having no RoW over it.

We don't know that there's 'nigh-on zero chance the driveway or footpath ever being questioned in future' because we don't know who might do the questioning and we don't know what might be questioned. Yet.

Hb92

After your helpful comments and solicitors advice we have decided to just pay it and be done with it to get the sale over the line.

Really not worth losing the sale for such little money in the end

incus432

OP - we had exactly the is situation when sold our house 2 months ago. The buyer's solicitor found the LR title did not include some of the verge land on which the driveway was buiilt (35 years ago).  (This had not been raised as a problem by our solicitor when buying in 2007. and noone had ever challenged it or our use) . We agreed to pay the indemnity (about £600 on 700k house) rather then risk losing our cash buyer. 

Contrary to what someone else said above it is not always the mortgage lender who wants to have this sorted legally. Not doing this makes it harder for the buyer to sell later on 

As for the boiler I would do it if it's due. Debateable if not.