Discovered hidden council deed after buying house – any legal options?

EssexHebridean

The seller ISN’t allowed to lie - absolutely not, that is clear. (And I certainly didn’t say anything that suggested that was the case - my use of “theoretically” was intended to convey that yes, you could go after them for misrepresentation (possibly not the technical/correct term) there BUT it would be extremely expensive, and you may not get back what you wanted from the outlay)

Not known is often used on a TA6 where there is genuine lack of knowledge - Japanese knotweed for example , if you are selling a property and have absolutely no clue what JK looks like, then the advice is often to use “not known” rather than No - because if JK then appears, the seller could say “I honestly didn’t know what was what it was”l that said, it should ONKY be used in that situation - when genuinely and in good faith it is the truthful answer to the question. To use “not known” when clearly the correct answer is that the seller DID know, is not acceptable. 

On the planning side of things - yes, it’s always a good idea for a buyer to search the local planning portal to check if anything flags up that might not appear in the local search - for example what if the property next door has just applied for permission to build a ****-off massive extension running right along the border with the property to be purchased -  that might make a difference to whether you’d want to buy or not, yes? If you do check there, then there is no way you’re going to know about it - and yes, that does come down to buyer responsibility. My personal view is that this is something that should be much more widely shouted about as well. Similarly once you own a property, a monthly check of the local planning portal is still a good idea - always better to be alerted to things locally that you might want to challenge rather than finding out once the time limit has expired! 

The point in the solicitor’s roles - or particularly in your case the buying solicitor - is that they will check aspects to do with the title, to ensure that there is no issue there. They can however only check documentation that they are aware of - if as you say a document was not provided and wasn’t apparent (I assume that there is nothing on the title relating to this deed? If there was then that could place a difference perspective on things, although in that instance you would have been aware in any event) 

user1977

Did you do any research of your own into the criteria needed to get a parking permit? It's certainly quite common that once such a scheme is in place, subdivided properties don't acquire rights to park on the street. I would never just assume that a resident in such an area can get a permit. Did you discuss that with your solicitor at all?

As for any loss in value, you'd have to get evidence that there is any difference in market value between identical properties with and without the ability to get a permit. You might struggle.

Chief_of_Staffy

UKresident3333 said:

EssexHebridean said:

First - you will have been provided with a copy of the searches, so presumably when you read through them you didn’t flag up anything about the parking situation or you would have alerted your solicitor to this if you had thought they’d missed it, if that’s so, then you can assume there was nothing there to raise concerns. 

Looking at the planning stuff around the property - not just what was provided by the seller’s solicitor but also the stuff you found online yourself via the local planning portal - are you confident that there was nothing in there that ought to have raised a red flag, and that you just missed at the time?

if the seller signed the TA6 having put a “not known” about a parking restriction that they signed a deed relating to, then you would theoretically have come back there - but I suspect you will need to weigh up whether it will be worth what might be a protracted and expensive legal exercise to get anything sorted that way. And in any event what outcome do you want from this?

So is it the buyer's responsibility to search on the local planning portal to find this information - if so, what is the point in the two solicitors' roles? Does that mean I do not have grounds for a legal case as I could have just searched this on the local planning portal, and the seller is allowed to lie and put 'not known' in the seller questionnaire? (These are genuine questions by the way as I'm not too experienced or knowledgeable in this field)

In terms of what outcome I'd want - for me it is clear. The value of the house was based on there being no parking restrictions and we paid an amount believing there was no parking permit restriction deed against the property. So I would want to be compensated for the decreased value of the property compared to what I paid for it.

If the seller signed the deed and didn't admit it, even when pressed, then you have good grounds to sue. That's exactly what the TA6 form is for. There is no 'get out clause' of the seller being able to lie on the assumption that the buyer will discover the truth somewhere down the line. Quantifying your monetary loss and therefore compensation is more difficult, and the more evidence you provide for your claim the better your chances of an acceptable result.

EssexHebridean

user1977 said:

Did you do any research of your own into the criteria needed to get a parking permit? It's certainly quite common that once such a scheme is in place, subdivided properties don't acquire rights to park on the street. I would never just assume that a resident in such an area can get a permit. Did you discuss that with your solicitor at all?

As for any loss in value, you'd have to get evidence that there is any difference in market value between identical properties with and without the ability to get a permit. You might struggle.

Yes - that final paragraph there is the crux of it isn’t it. This sort of action isn’t going to be cheap, and unless the seller was prepared to admit early in that they had lied, and is in a financial position to make an offer, it might be good money after bad.

Grumpy_chap

kinger101 said:

It would be difficult to prove the seller did know.  Your solicitor has failed so my initial complaint would be with them.

That might really depend on the specific person who signed the agreement with the Local Authority:

UKresident3333 said:

Hi everyone,

I’m hoping for some guidance on a situation I’ve discovered recently.

I bought my house about 2 years ago. I’ve just found out that a deed was signed between the seller and the council a few years before the sale. This deed states that no occupier or owner of the property can apply for a residents’ parking permit because the house is part of a low car housing scheme. This was a condition imposed by the council when planning permission was granted to the developers to split an existing house into two houses - one of which we purchased.

This deed was never provided to me or my solicitor during conveyancing.

In the TA6 Property Information Form (I think that’s what it’s called - the seller’s questionnaire), the seller answered “not known” to the question about whether the property is affected by any parking schemes or restrictions. Their solicitor even told ours to “rely on your own searches”.

Our solicitor later concluded that all searches were fine - though I’m not sure whether this deed was missed by them or simply not available in the searches.

My questions are:

1. Can I take legal action against the seller for withholding this information?

2. Would this amount to fraudulent misrepresentation, given the seller clearly knew about the restriction (they signed the deed themselves just a few years earlier)?

3. Is it realistically worth pursuing legally - what are the chances of success or recovering any money, and what would the costs likely be?

I’d really appreciate any advice.

Thanks in advance for any help - this has been a real shock to discover and my wife and I feel as though we've been conned. 

Was that the same seller - the same individual - from whom the OP purchased the property?
Or was that a deed signed between the developer who split the single property into two, prior the seller from whom the OP purchased acquiring the property?

However, I do think the responses on the TA6 as to "not known" about parking restrictions and "rely on your own searches" were very carefully phrased by the vendor / vendor's solicitor.  That comment is probably suggesting that the information is in the public domain.  Is that the case?  
Is the information only available by reference to the planning permission, or is it somewhere more readily accessible?

Given that two years have passed since the OP purchased the property, what loss has the OP suffered as a result?
Is there really no need for a resident's permit?
Has the OP successfully obtained resident's permits since moving in?

What was the event that brought this deed to light now?

Section62

UKresident3333 said:

...

I bought my house about 2 years ago. I’ve just found out that a deed was signed between the seller and the council a few years before the sale. This deed states that no occupier or owner of the property can apply for a residents’ parking permit because the house is part of a low car housing scheme. This was a condition imposed by the council when planning permission was granted to the developers to split an existing house into two houses - one of which we purchased.

This deed was never provided to me or my solicitor during conveyancing.

...

Some councils write the deed/agreement to include an obligation on the developer(/present owner) to inform a prospective buyer that the property is part of a car-free development and/or that the number of permits available to the property is zero/reduced.

This is precisely to avoid the situation you are in where someone buys a property without knowing they won't be able to get a parking permit (and from the council's POV helps avoid protracted correspondence with the unaware buyer who now wants a parking permit).

If an obligation like that was included in the deed in your case then it won't help you get a permit, but might be helpful in demonstrating the vendor/vendor's solicitor should have done more than just tell you to do your own research.

UKresident3333

Section62 said:

UKresident3333 said:

...

I bought my house about 2 years ago. I’ve just found out that a deed was signed between the seller and the council a few years before the sale. This deed states that no occupier or owner of the property can apply for a residents’ parking permit because the house is part of a low car housing scheme. This was a condition imposed by the council when planning permission was granted to the developers to split an existing house into two houses - one of which we purchased.

This deed was never provided to me or my solicitor during conveyancing.

...

Some councils write the deed/agreement to include an obligation on the developer(/present owner) to inform a prospective buyer that the property is part of a car-free development and/or that the number of permits available to the property is zero/reduced.

This is precisely to avoid the situation you are in where someone buys a property without knowing they won't be able to get a parking permit (and from the council's POV helps avoid protracted correspondence with the unaware buyer who now wants a parking permit).

If an obligation like that was included in the deed in your case then it won't help you get a permit, but might be helpful in demonstrating the vendor/vendor's solicitor should have done more than just tell you to do your own research.

You are SPOT ON! This is in fact in the deed and it states they have to let future occupants know about the deed which they didn't!

UKresident3333

Grumpy_chap said:

kinger101 said:

It would be difficult to prove the seller did know.  Your solicitor has failed so my initial complaint would be with them.

That might really depend on the specific person who signed the agreement with the Local Authority:

UKresident3333 said:

Hi everyone,

I’m hoping for some guidance on a situation I’ve discovered recently.

I bought my house about 2 years ago. I’ve just found out that a deed was signed between the seller and the council a few years before the sale. This deed states that no occupier or owner of the property can apply for a residents’ parking permit because the house is part of a low car housing scheme. This was a condition imposed by the council when planning permission was granted to the developers to split an existing house into two houses - one of which we purchased.

This deed was never provided to me or my solicitor during conveyancing.

In the TA6 Property Information Form (I think that’s what it’s called - the seller’s questionnaire), the seller answered “not known” to the question about whether the property is affected by any parking schemes or restrictions. Their solicitor even told ours to “rely on your own searches”.

Our solicitor later concluded that all searches were fine - though I’m not sure whether this deed was missed by them or simply not available in the searches.

My questions are:

1. Can I take legal action against the seller for withholding this information?

2. Would this amount to fraudulent misrepresentation, given the seller clearly knew about the restriction (they signed the deed themselves just a few years earlier)?

3. Is it realistically worth pursuing legally - what are the chances of success or recovering any money, and what would the costs likely be?

I’d really appreciate any advice.

Thanks in advance for any help - this has been a real shock to discover and my wife and I feel as though we've been conned. 

Was that the same seller - the same individual - from whom the OP purchased the property?
Or was that a deed signed between the developer who split the single property into two, prior the seller from whom the OP purchased acquiring the property?

However, I do think the responses on the TA6 as to "not known" about parking restrictions and "rely on your own searches" were very carefully phrased by the vendor / vendor's solicitor.  That comment is probably suggesting that the information is in the public domain.  Is that the case?  
Is the information only available by reference to the planning permission, or is it somewhere more readily accessible?

Given that two years have passed since the OP purchased the property, what loss has the OP suffered as a result?
Is there really no need for a resident's permit?
Has the OP successfully obtained resident's permits since moving in?

What was the event that brought this deed to light now?

Yes the same seller is the one who signed the deed. The seller is a 'company' (him and his wife) but that company signed the deed so yes it's the same person. Yes the information is in the public domain - I didn't check local planning portals at the time as I didn't know about this thing but since I've found it. However, my understanding is they can't lie on the TA6 either way? Also, the deed requires them to share the deed with buyers so I must have grounds for legal action there too? The loss is we can't park here during the day as there are two CPZ hours. We can't get a permit the council outright refuse and refer us back to the deed. This event was brought to light as we tried to apply for a permit and the council told us about the deed.

silvercar

Unless the seller didn't own a vehicle and never had guests who had a car that needed to be parked on the road, I don't know how they can argue they were unaware.

user1977

silvercar said:

Unless the seller didn't own a vehicle and never had guests who had a car that needed to be parked on the road, I don't know how they can argue they were unaware.

I would expect guests to be treated like any other visitor for parking purposes, the residents' permits would be purely for the resident vehicles.

I'd expect the sellers to be aware but I wouldn't say it's obvious that they were deliberately misleading the OP.

As I said above, the main problem is quantifying any loss, and even if you can, figuring out whether it's worthwhile pursuing.