We are in the process of buying a property when it has come to light a problem with Right of Access regarding the drive on the property we are planning to buy.
House A (which we are buying) is adjacent with House B. They have a shared boundary and both responsible for the fence. There isn't any fence and hasn't been since the vendor has lived there. Therefore the boundary is visually unclear. House A has a concrete and House B has a graveled drive but the size of the concrete doesn't correspond with the boundary.
The land registry plan states there is 1.9m space between the house A and the fence then a 1.9m from the fence to house B. If there was a fence up neither of them would be able to fit a car through.
Since the vendor has lived there they have been driving cars up the drive (going onto what looks like House B's drive) to the garage at the back of the house. The occupants of house B sent a solicitor letter to the vendor in 1999 stating that the vendor has been trespassing on House B's land when exercising a vehicular access to House A. However, nothing more got said and they continued on as usual.
Once the house was put up for sale House B occupants took the solicitors letter (still dating from 1999) to the estate agents saying that it will make the sale fall through.
It is in our interest that the dispute of the boundary is resolved before we buy and then take responsibility of sorting out the boundary (which will incur legal costs).
Our vendor has been very cooperative and says that they brought the house with right of access and are selling it with right of access at the front to get to the back. The vendor has been advised by his solicitor and the council that the following clause states that they have right of access:
'the property delineated and edged in red on the plan hereto annexed TOGETHER with and subject to the rights easements advantages and exceptions and reservations contained in the First Schedule hereto and together with the benefit of and subject to all matters contained mentioned or referred to in conveyance.
(...)
The First Schedule before referred to:
1. The right for the transferee in common with the owners and occupiers of adjacent property and all other person lawfully entitled thereto to use all paths drives sewers drains pipes wires cables conduits flues chimney stacks eave troughs and downpipes in under over or upon such property for the purpose and with the right of ingress and egress and of passing and running water soil gas and electricity and smoke to and from the property through the same subject to the provisions that all such items shall be repaired and maintained at the joint and equal expense of the owners of all property and those using the said paths drives sewers drains pipes wires cables conduits flues chimney stacks eave troughs and downpipes EXCEPTING AND RESERVING unto the transferor and its successors in title the like right to use the paths drives sewers drains pipes wires cables conduits flues chimney stacks eave troughs and downpipes in under over or upon the property and RESERVING likewise the like right of ingress and egress and of passing running water soil gas electricity and smoke through the same in under over or upon the property subject to the same proviso with regard to repair and maintenance as hereinbefore referred to'
My solicitor said that this clause does not state that House A has right of access but more to do with the servicing of the property. She advised that the vendor and the occupants of House B need to sort the boundary dispute before we buy. Either by changing the deeds to a shared driveway or something agreed to by both.
The occupants of House B haven't said another word to the vendor since the letter was sent to the estate agents and haven't involved a solicitor.
However, we don't want to move in and then this become our problem to resolve.
Any advice would be much appreciated or whether the above quote from the deeds does state (in legal jargon) that house A has right of access.
House A (which we are buying) is adjacent with House B. They have a shared boundary and both responsible for the fence. There isn't any fence and hasn't been since the vendor has lived there. Therefore the boundary is visually unclear. House A has a concrete and House B has a graveled drive but the size of the concrete doesn't correspond with the boundary.
The land registry plan states there is 1.9m space between the house A and the fence then a 1.9m from the fence to house B. If there was a fence up neither of them would be able to fit a car through.
Since the vendor has lived there they have been driving cars up the drive (going onto what looks like House B's drive) to the garage at the back of the house. The occupants of house B sent a solicitor letter to the vendor in 1999 stating that the vendor has been trespassing on House B's land when exercising a vehicular access to House A. However, nothing more got said and they continued on as usual.
Once the house was put up for sale House B occupants took the solicitors letter (still dating from 1999) to the estate agents saying that it will make the sale fall through.
It is in our interest that the dispute of the boundary is resolved before we buy and then take responsibility of sorting out the boundary (which will incur legal costs).
Our vendor has been very cooperative and says that they brought the house with right of access and are selling it with right of access at the front to get to the back. The vendor has been advised by his solicitor and the council that the following clause states that they have right of access:
'the property delineated and edged in red on the plan hereto annexed TOGETHER with and subject to the rights easements advantages and exceptions and reservations contained in the First Schedule hereto and together with the benefit of and subject to all matters contained mentioned or referred to in conveyance.
(...)
The First Schedule before referred to:
1. The right for the transferee in common with the owners and occupiers of adjacent property and all other person lawfully entitled thereto to use all paths drives sewers drains pipes wires cables conduits flues chimney stacks eave troughs and downpipes in under over or upon such property for the purpose and with the right of ingress and egress and of passing and running water soil gas and electricity and smoke to and from the property through the same subject to the provisions that all such items shall be repaired and maintained at the joint and equal expense of the owners of all property and those using the said paths drives sewers drains pipes wires cables conduits flues chimney stacks eave troughs and downpipes EXCEPTING AND RESERVING unto the transferor and its successors in title the like right to use the paths drives sewers drains pipes wires cables conduits flues chimney stacks eave troughs and downpipes in under over or upon the property and RESERVING likewise the like right of ingress and egress and of passing running water soil gas electricity and smoke through the same in under over or upon the property subject to the same proviso with regard to repair and maintenance as hereinbefore referred to'
My solicitor said that this clause does not state that House A has right of access but more to do with the servicing of the property. She advised that the vendor and the occupants of House B need to sort the boundary dispute before we buy. Either by changing the deeds to a shared driveway or something agreed to by both.
The occupants of House B haven't said another word to the vendor since the letter was sent to the estate agents and haven't involved a solicitor.
However, we don't want to move in and then this become our problem to resolve.
Any advice would be much appreciated or whether the above quote from the deeds does state (in legal jargon) that house A has right of access.