NEIGHBOUR CROSSED THE BOUNDARY BEFORE EXCHANGE

[MummyToBeAgain1]

Hi

I need some advice please.

We're buying a semi detached property and due to exchange and complete in a week or 2.

Over the weekend we drove past the property to find a fence being built between our garden and the property on the right. I suspected they had come in to our garden at a glance so drove past again yesterday.

The fence had fully been up and clearly it crossed in to our garden (to be). I've attached a quick drawing which shows what I mean. The red line is the fence the neighbour has put up.

Just for some context this is a auction property as the owner has died and the children wanted a quick sale. This means that we have a deadline for completition which makes things more stressful.

What do we do now?

Tia

I think I might pull out. It’s an awkward start to neighbour hood life

Another way to look at this is if the OP moves in without this problem being solved, and the neighbours won't cooperate (and putting to one side that this could easily end up result in a toxic situation), then how much would it cost to enforce legal rights through the courts?

I'd say that could easily exceed £10000. Which would also involve an incredibly stressful year, or longer.

I spent more than that on a legal fees with similar dispute that we didn’t start because the neighbour was unhinged - and that was after including a reduction on the legal bill because the solution was one I suggested at the very start. It mounts up incredibly quickly - and that didn’t even include anyone coming to survey the boundary.

I'd say that could easily exceed £10000. Which would also involve an incredibly stressful year, or longer.

I agree and it would probably be more. It's why its so important to get the vendors to deal with it now.

The vendors are highly motivated to sort this because they want to sell it.

If the neighbours are unreasonable, if you are in a situation where you have to go to court, there is (assuming OP is right and this is a land grab and there isnt some right to the land or something that gives the neighbours a right) a good case for an urgent injunction because it's a new change, the vendors want to sell and there is the agreed completion date. There is a lot there to persuade a judge to grant an injunction and you have good grounds to go urgently.

Contrast this with after the sale, there is now no urgency because the purchaser has come to the situation with eyes open so you are into normal litigation and a normal neighbour dispute. It's much more likely to drag on.

It’s not urgent and the agent is better placed to deal with it.

Me too! I would have gone and challenged the CF neighbour about WTF he was doing, or making sure he saw me taking pictures of the theft/new position and damage so they knew they'd been rumbled! 😡

@AlwaysCoffee25

you are completely wrong on both counts. It's urgent for the reasons I said - the completion date creates urgency. Once that has gone, there is no urgency which legally leaves whoever is stuck with the problem in a weaker position. If OP is still keen to buy, that completion date urgency is a good lever to motivate the seller to sort it out with the aim of keeping the completion date. When people are doing things that enroach on your rights are changing the status quo, it is always urgent because the longer you leave it, legally the hard it becomes to persuade a court that the original way should be kept in place by an injunction until it is resolved.

The agent is not better placed to deal with it because it is literally nothing to do with them. Clue is in the name AGENT. The agent is just an introducing agency. The legal rights in play and the people who need and can resolve it are between first the current owner and the landgrabbing neighbours and then second the the current owner and the OP who is buying. It is open to the OP to buy anyway which the agent has zero control over.

This! ⬆️

Thanks for saying what I said a few pages back in more words and with less accuracy.

The agent is better placed to speak to the vendor and deal with it. OP’s solicitors only task is to relay information to the otherside, which not only can the agent do, but can remove a link by speaking directly to the vendor.

When you are juggling a busy case load this might be pressured, but it is not critical, unlike other matters such as completions that day. Once the message has got to the vendors - it’s their problem. There is no benefit in OP’s solicitor jumping up and down, you don’t need to be on the roll of solicitors to make a phone call. OP’s solicitor simply needs to be alert to the fact.

The vendor’s solicitor, conversely, can assist (if they are appropriately experienced and not mere conveyancers) in helping resolve the actual issue at hand.

Just to add - it is an agents job to liaise with both parties and manage the non legal elements of the sale. Passing a message over is precisely that.

Yes I missed that and agree it warrants a response.

Have you driven past since @MummyToBeAgain1 ? Just in case the neighbours have any other devious plans and are actively pursuing them. Good luck and agree with all those who said to keep the pressure on those who are responsible for sorting out the mess.

Yes and no further changes.

Hoping for a positive coming week. I'm optimistic things will work out. I want the completion to take place as planned - fingers crossed!

What about the wall they demolished as well?!

This sort of situation is just too messy for criminal law which requires establishing criminal intent. There’s too much room for people to claim they thought it was their land, they thought it was their wall, they thought they had permission, etc.

There’s no way for the criminal law to effectively deal with these sorts of disputes so the police will back away from them and tell you to see a solicitor and use civil law.

fingers crossed but chase chase chase!

Thanks for saying what I said a few pages back in more words and with less accuracy.

Your comprehension skills are somewhat lacking. It's not what you said and you said it wasn't urgent and you are still saying go through the agent which makes no sense. The agent has a vested interest in doing nothing and not relaying the information at all in the hope that late discovery by the vendor will mean the OP will just go with the sale anyway and think they have to sort it out.

There is no benefit in OP’s solicitor jumping up and down, you don’t need to be on the roll of solicitors to make a phone call. OP’s solicitor simply needs to be alert to the fact.

OPs solicitor is acting for them. The agent is not.

It's not about 'jumping up and down'. It's about emphasising the urgency and having a written record of the time and date the information was received by the Vendor. It is urgent because of the completion date advantage to OP and mostly to the vendor in case they want an injunction. In this situation a week is a long time which makes it urgent.

@usersldjfksdoi

If the vendor gets an injunction they’re not going to have it rectified within 56 days. Their only hope of having it sorted in the timeframe is if the neighbour puts it right at the first instance (seems unlikely).

I bet the neighbour believes it’s their land and has taken this opportunity to “reclaim” it.

If the vendor gets an injunction they’re not going to have it rectified within 56 days.

They may do. Sometimes getting an interim injunction is the end of the matter because the party injuncted sees which way the wind is blowing and settles the case quickly.

Did you get any progress today? Been thinking about your situation all weekend after getting stuck in a 'homes under the hammer' binge-watch frenzy (yes, I'm boring!)

Any news today?

Any updates OP?

Here's the thing OP. The other side and their olicuitiors HAVE to fix this... if not for you (I suspect you may pull out of the deal) then for the sake a future sale. They now have a boundary dispute, and no other buyer (under the advice of their solicitor) is going to touch that property without an agreement.

Regarding our own dispute (which I explained upthread, and which was resolved - the new owners are in), I found out from the new owners that the madman who tried to grab a share of the access is still telling people it was his and we 'stole' it. There's nothing he can do about it, having signed an agreement delineating the boundary line (which his own father set when the property was sold to us!), but it's bloody galling to think a crazy person is tarring our name locally.
People get properly unhinged about land and boundaries.

"People get properly unhinged about land and boundaries."

No, I'd say land and boundaries are one of the areas where unhinged people show their true colours. An important difference.

I don’t disagree with what you’ve said, however the situation is different with a traditional auction sale. The legal information pack is all of the documentation that the vendor has agreed to disclose and quite often there is a clause stating that you may not ask further questions of the vendor’s solicitor. The exchange takes place as soon as the auction has ended so it is about completion. You would be amazed how many people buy properties at auction having not read any of the legal pack nor visited the property and it is the case that you may end up buying a property that has a boundary dispute in existence which has been disclosed in the documentation. Auction sales are about realising the cash as soon as possible.

In this case, I think it appears to be a probate sale which does not indicate any knowledge of any boundary dispute (indeed the situation arose after the exchange had taken place)and more about facilitating a speedy sale. I think a PP mentioned that this is a modern method of auction (I’m not familiar with how these differ as I’ve never used one) but I’d be surprised if the OP does not have the right to walk away given that the terms of the agreement at the end of the auction have materially changed.

it is the case that the vendors may choose not to compel the OP to complete on the sale, do not resolve the boundary dispute and simply put the property back into another auction. If they do not acknowledge that there is indeed a boundary dispute, there would be no need to disclose it in another auction sale. It wouldn’t be how I would conduct myself, but I think it is probably up to the edge of where you may draw the legal line.