Buying house with a restrictive covenant to maintain retaining wall next to train tracks

DePijp

I am in the process of buying a house directly adjacent to train tracks. The house is a leasehold with 3 separate leases; 1 for the house and back yard, and 2 for the garden, all adjacent to the train tracks. The covenants / legal obligations of the lease say that '12. You must maintain the retaining wall at the property.' The property is long and narrow and the retaining wall is fairly tall so I'm concerned if there are any issues it could be complicated and expensive to fix. Does anyone have any experience or knowledge of this situation?

silvercar

You need to factor in the costs of complying.

ensure you have building insurance that covers this.

twopenny

Has anyone checked on the condition of the wall? 
You need to ensure that it has been maintained by the previous leaseholder before you purchase.

Section62

DePijp said:

I am in the process of buying a house directly adjacent to train tracks. The house is a leasehold with 3 separate leases; 1 for the house and back yard, and 2 for the garden, all adjacent to the train tracks. The covenants / legal obligations of the lease say that '12. You must maintain the retaining wall at the property.' The property is long and narrow and the retaining wall is fairly tall so I'm concerned if there are any issues it could be complicated and expensive to fix. Does anyone have any experience or knowledge of this situation?

Anything related to railway permanent way is expensive.  Every 'i' and every 't' will need dotting and crossing before work is done.  You could potentially double or treble the cost of maintenance/repairs being adjacent to a railway.  And work on large retaining walls is expensive to start with.

I'd be looking elsewhere for a property.

Albermarle

When you have a survey done, make it clear to the surveyor in advance that it is particularly important they have a good look at the wall. Hopefully they will be happy to do so.
Any report on its condition will be full of caveats, but at least they should spot anything obviously wrong.

molerat

It screams run away to me.  If the wall does need repairing at some time it is unlikely you could simply get a brickie in to patch it up, you would need to get the railway engineers involved causing pain and additional cost.  Don't see many threads here on the subject but elsewhere there is plenty about the pain and cost of dealing with the simplest of things involving the railway.

Section62

Albermarle said:

When you have a survey done, make it clear to the surveyor in advance that it is particularly important they have a good look at the wall. Hopefully they will be happy to do so.
Any report on its condition will be full of caveats, but at least they should spot anything obviously wrong.

That could be the start of the OP's problems.  If the railway is lower than the property then the surveyor probably needs access to the railway land to survey the wall properly - and unless the railway is an infrequently used branch line then Network Rail may only permit access during an engineering possession.  If the location lacks an adequate "position of safety" then a possession is likely to be mandatory.  

The surveyor won't be allowed to go onto operational land without Network Rail staff present, and this is likely to require multiple people, who may well come from different teams in different locations.  The OP would probably be expected to pay all costs (time/travel/third-party) and Network Rail may insist on the surveyor being one with up-to-date training in whatever lineside safety procedures Network Rail currently use.  Even if Network Rail have their own work to do on the line at the same time they will probably still seek to charge the OP full costs, rather than a proportion.

Albermarle

Section62 said:

Albermarle said:

When you have a survey done, make it clear to the surveyor in advance that it is particularly important they have a good look at the wall. Hopefully they will be happy to do so.
Any report on its condition will be full of caveats, but at least they should spot anything obviously wrong.

That could be the start of the OP's problems.  If the railway is lower than the property then the surveyor probably needs access to the railway land to survey the wall properly - and unless the railway is an infrequently used branch line then Network Rail may only permit access during an engineering possession.  If the location lacks an adequate "position of safety" then a possession is likely to be mandatory.  

The surveyor won't be allowed to go onto operational land without Network Rail staff present, and this is likely to require multiple people, who may well come from different teams in different locations.  The OP would probably be expected to pay all costs (time/travel/third-party) and Network Rail may insist on the surveyor being one with up-to-date training in whatever lineside safety procedures Network Rail currently use.  Even if Network Rail have their own work to do on the line at the same time they will probably still seek to charge the OP full costs, rather than a proportion.

When you explain it like that, it does seem like walking away could be the best option.

ExEstateAgent

I'm sure it will be absolutely fine and nothing to really worry yourself about, until something goes wrong and then it could be a living nightmare and leave you liable for huge financial liabilities (think claims by the railways for loss of income if the line had to be closed for repairs to a wall etc., and finding that your insurance policy isn't valid because of some oversight or failure to disclose some minor detail!). 

BikingBud

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/20/commuter-train-near-barcelona-hits-collapsed-wall-injuring-several-people


Also: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-work/living-by-the-railway/buying-property-next-to-the-railway/

We understand that you’ll need to maintain boundary walls and fences between your property and the railway, but sometimes it can be difficult to determine who has responsibility. Each case is unique and identifying liabilities for walls and fences can cost a lot and might not be conclusive. If you want to clarify or contest ownership of a boundary with the railway, you should contact us in the first instance.

Albermarle

BikingBud said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/20/commuter-train-near-barcelona-hits-collapsed-wall-injuring-several-people


Also: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-work/living-by-the-railway/buying-property-next-to-the-railway/

We understand that you’ll need to maintain boundary walls and fences between your property and the railway, but sometimes it can be difficult to determine who has responsibility. Each case is unique and identifying liabilities for walls and fences can cost a lot and might not be conclusive. If you want to clarify or contest ownership of a boundary with the railway, you should contact us in the first instance.

It is complicated isn't it, because Network Rail is normally responsible for any boundary fence between their land and yours, as said in that link.
We’re responsible for the fencing that forms the boundary to the railway. If there’s a problem with our fencing we will either fix the fence or replace it.
I wonder in this case if there is a fence behind the wall, or if the wall is the only boundary. In the latter case it would seem to be a grey area who might be responsible.