PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Help! House Purchase – Water Main, Lost Deeds, No PP/BC …
Options
Rogue_G
Posts: 9 Forumite
I’ve been reading this forum for a while now, and there are a lot of very knowledge people on here that give some great advice. So here I am seeking some assistance! ��
We’re currently in the process of trying to buy a house (Week 12) and quite a few issues have come up. It’s a detached house (built circa 1910) that has had a substantial extension added to it (1988). The current seller has also built (2006) a detached, double-garage building in front of the house. There is a second floor (dormer-style) to this double-garage building which they currently use as an office for their company. Access to the second floor is via a timber staircase to the side of the building. There is also a bathroom on the second floor and the building has its own gas fired boiler.
There is a water main pipe (4”) that runs through the property boundaries (it’s definitely a water main, not drainage/sewage). We have a copy of the way-leave agreement legal deed for the water main, and it states that nothing should be built on top, or within 7.5 feet of the water main. However, local searches have revealed that the double-garage building has been built on top of the water main.
Currently the situation is this:
1. They have lost their house deeds.
2. They cannot demonstrate Planning Permission or Building Control Approval for the extensions on the main/original house. County planning records only shows permission granted for ‘extensions’. This was over 30 years ago and the Building Survey Report said nothing untoward about the extensions.
3. They cannot demonstrate Planning Permission or Building Control Approval for the 2-storey, double-garage building. County planning records only shows permission granted for ‘garage’.
4. They do not have a Build Over Agreement for the double-garage building.
As I understand:
1. The double-garage building is illegal, as the water board/company reserves the right to demolish the building at any point they decide to gain access to their water main.
2. We cannot recognise the second floor of the double-garage building as anything more than storage, as they cannot prove planning permission and building control approval for them.
3. The lost house deeds provides a re-sale risk to us.
Is that true? Therefore … are we right to subtract the cost of the double-garage building in its entirety from the purchase price, as well as a sum for the associated re-sale risk due to the lost house deeds?
The seller is of the opinion that they have done nothing wrong in building the double-garage over the water main. Also, they say they were not aware of its existence when it's was built in 2006, even though it was the seller that gave us a copy of the way-leave legal deed.
We’re currently in the process of trying to buy a house (Week 12) and quite a few issues have come up. It’s a detached house (built circa 1910) that has had a substantial extension added to it (1988). The current seller has also built (2006) a detached, double-garage building in front of the house. There is a second floor (dormer-style) to this double-garage building which they currently use as an office for their company. Access to the second floor is via a timber staircase to the side of the building. There is also a bathroom on the second floor and the building has its own gas fired boiler.
There is a water main pipe (4”) that runs through the property boundaries (it’s definitely a water main, not drainage/sewage). We have a copy of the way-leave agreement legal deed for the water main, and it states that nothing should be built on top, or within 7.5 feet of the water main. However, local searches have revealed that the double-garage building has been built on top of the water main.
Currently the situation is this:
1. They have lost their house deeds.
2. They cannot demonstrate Planning Permission or Building Control Approval for the extensions on the main/original house. County planning records only shows permission granted for ‘extensions’. This was over 30 years ago and the Building Survey Report said nothing untoward about the extensions.
3. They cannot demonstrate Planning Permission or Building Control Approval for the 2-storey, double-garage building. County planning records only shows permission granted for ‘garage’.
4. They do not have a Build Over Agreement for the double-garage building.
As I understand:
1. The double-garage building is illegal, as the water board/company reserves the right to demolish the building at any point they decide to gain access to their water main.
2. We cannot recognise the second floor of the double-garage building as anything more than storage, as they cannot prove planning permission and building control approval for them.
3. The lost house deeds provides a re-sale risk to us.
Is that true? Therefore … are we right to subtract the cost of the double-garage building in its entirety from the purchase price, as well as a sum for the associated re-sale risk due to the lost house deeds?
The seller is of the opinion that they have done nothing wrong in building the double-garage over the water main. Also, they say they were not aware of its existence when it's was built in 2006, even though it was the seller that gave us a copy of the way-leave legal deed.
0
Comments
-
What does your solicitor state?
Is the ownership registered with Land Registry? I.E is it just the physical deeds that have been lost. Depending on the answer, could mean different things.0 -
This sounds a nightmare, hopefully someone can help soon.0
-
What's the reason for continuing to contemplate the purchase of this nightmare of a property?
I wouldn't contemplate entering a situation where the following joke might transpire:
Water company: knock knock
You: Who's there?
Water company: not your garage any more
Even if you get the price down, the actual aggravation associated with the garage and its removal will still be on your plate, along with the associated uncertainty.0 -
middleclassbutpoor wrote: »What does your solicitor state?
Is the ownership registered with Land Registry? I.E is it just the physical deeds that have been lost. Depending on the answer, could mean different things.
Yes, the house is registered with Land Registry. So it's the physical deeds and al the historical paperwork that comes with the 'deed pack' that you get when you usual;ly buy a house. The seller's solicitor seems to be remaining silent through the whole process (maybe that says something?!) Our solicitor agrees with our conclusion i.e the sale could go ahead, but without the cost of the double-garage etc.0 -
quantumlobster wrote: »What's the reason for continuing to contemplate the purchase of this nightmare of a property?
I wouldn't contemplate entering a situation where the following joke might transpire:
Water company: knock knock
You: Who's there?
Water company: not your garage any more
Even if you get the price down, the actual aggravation associated with the garage and its removal will still be on your plate, along with the associated uncertainty.
Haha, great reply!
Houses of this kind are in short demand in the area and it's taken us a while to find this one. And it is a nice house, lovely inside. We have a baby on the way so the plan was to be in a new home in time, so we didn't want to go into rented acomoodation really. But if needs be etc.
If we dropped our offer we would, essentially, not be paying for the double-garage. Then if the water board knock it down, we won't have lost any value.
Alternativelly, the seller could quickly get a quote for re-routing the pipe directly from the water board (implying their approval of the re-routing at the same time). From the price we would then subtract the cost of the re-routing the pipe and the cost of the second floor?0 -
The seller could do that, but I bet they won't.Haha, great reply! Houses of this kind are in short demand in the area and it's taken us a while to find this one. And it is a nice house, lovely inside. We have a baby on the way so the plan was to be in a new home in time, so we didn't want to go into rented accommodation really. But if needs be etc.
If we dropped our offer we would, essentially, not be paying for the double-garage. Then if the water board knock it down, we won't have lost any value.
Alternatively, the seller could quickly get a quote for re-routing the pipe directly from the water board (implying their approval of the re-routing at the same time). From the price we would then subtract the cost of the re-routing the pipe and the cost of the second floor?
I think you're going to have to do all the legwork on quantifying the reduction - and don't be surprised if you're invited to fornicate elsewhere, if the delta between your offer and the asking is a big number.0 -
The actual risk of the pipe being dug up is minuscule, and can probably be insured against. So no, I doubt that subtracting the whole value of the garage makes any sense.
As for the consents, the 1988 works are too old for any lack of consents to be a practical concern. The more recent works may be, but again can be insured against. I would be more interested in what the actual condition of the property is i.e. if it all complies with building regulations and all you're lacking is the bit of paper saying so, that's a different proposition from something which the council would have condemned if they had been asked to look at it.
And it doesn't sound like there are any further "lost deeds" of relevance, so that's not really an additional problem.0 -
You need to know how deep the main is and if the water board's plan is anywhere near accurate.
We had a similar problem when buying our property, which is also a one-off. According to CON29D, the main to the village went right under the barn the vendors had built in 2004, but I doubted that. They'd surely have noticed?
To be blunt, I didn't give a monkey's anyway, as it had taken an age to find this, so I didn't investigate till after we'd moved in.
Out came the divining rods....The water main ws about 5-6m from the barn, but I still didn't know how deep till 2013, when we almost drove a gatepost through it. It was only 600mm down!
If it came to it, re-routing a shallow main would be much easier and cheaper than demolition.0 -
The water board aren't going to just come and knock down your garage for fun. It's only going to be a problem if/when they need to replace the water main. Do you have any idea how old it is? Victorian cast irons mains could be replaced any time, modern plastic ones could be there for another 100 years or more.
You should be able to take out insurance against the water company needing access anyway. The vendors of my current house built a rear extension over a sewerage pipe, which violates the water company's wayleave; my mortgage provider required me to get insurance which will pay for the sewage pipe to be re-routed and the extension rebuilt should the water company require access. It cost about £200.
With no planning for the second floor of the garage, you should price as if it's storage. But then if you wish to go ahead and use it as an office space it's unlikely the council will realise and serve notice on you. If they do, it'll just be notice to stop using it as office space; it becomes just storage, which is all you paid for anyway.
With no building regulation approval certificates... I wouldn't worry. After 1 year the council can only do anything if the work is dangerous. Your survey should tell you if that's the case. There's a chance that the work is up to full safety standards, e.g. there might be normal doors where fire doors are required, or there might be only one route of escape from a bedroom, but to be honest the occasions where those safety features are actually used is pretty rare. Then again cladding catching fire from a fridge fire wasn't expected (Grenfell). Up to you to do your own risk:benefit analysis, but driving or crossing a road is more dangerous than sleeping in a room with only one escape route, and I'm happy to drive or walk every day.
Lack of deeds: I don't know how this affects things when the property is on the land registry. Talk to your solicitor.
PS Your solicitor isn't there to tell you how much you should knock off the price. Your solicitor is there to tell you the legal facts and risks. If you suggest knocking £20k off the price, your solicitor can say "yes I can communicate that for you", but I severely doubt they said "Yes, £20k reduction is about right for this situation."0 -
Just to add - and you may already be fully aware of this - but if you are going to try and get some indemnity insurance, it is vital that you do NOT contact either the Council or the water company. Your solicitor should be in the best position to advise you whether any indemnity insurance is required and who should pay for it. Best of luck!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards