Seller apparently doesn't own their garden any more...

[Darkerdowndays]

We viewed and made an offer on a house a few months ago, and at the time the seller casually mentioned that only half of the garden was actually on the house deeds, but that it did belong to the house and they'd had exclusive use for 20 years, were happy to provide evidence so we could get it added to the deeds, etc.

Our solicitor has now asked the seller for details and they've completely changed their story, claiming they've actually only maintained that land as part of his job, and that it's belonged to a local trust the whole time I'm gutted and incredibly frustrated; a decent garden is a big deal for me, and I don't know if we'd have made an offer without it. But the market round us seems to be absolute rubbish at the moment, there's literally nothing else we like within our budget. Not sure if we should pull out and stay in our current house (and let our poor buyers down), or let the cheeky buggers get away with the lie and proceed with the purchase, both feel like rubbish options at the minute.

pull out

Looking at it purely from the fact you wanted a bigger garden and were looking forward to having that, I would walk away. We have lived in our current house for 18 years and compromised on a smaller garden. It has rankled slightly all these years. We are planning to move and top of the list is a garden at least twice the size of the one we've got. Don't compromise on what you want or you will possibly always feel a bit hard done by. You are spending a lot of money - spend it right. I also think the property has been on the market for a while because of this trust problem. If it was so easily sorted, why hasn't the present owner dealt with it?

Pull out, with the offer to the estate agent that you will sell the survey/reports to future buyers. Might be able to get a bit of your money back that you’ve spent getting to this point?

I think you will regret it f you don't pull out.

Our solicitor says they've had dealings with the trust in the past and they're often stubborn and protracted

They'll also know perfectly well that the vendor - if he raises this himself - will want to secure the land so as to get a better price for his house

Why would that motivate the trust to sell it to him? They might even ask him to split the profit from it if they did, which is another nightmare to contend with

As said, I can think of no possible reason not to walk away

You said it is not in an ideal location and now you find out the land you would be purchasing is half that you thought it was.
I could perhaps overlook the location if I thought the house was great in all other aspects but to lose 2/3s of a garden and still be in a less than ideal location would be a dealbreaker for me.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

I do think it’s worth a look at the estate agent because it absolutist their responsibility at law to accurately describe the property

Maybe, but that little phrase about "EA particulars forming no part of a contract" is there for a reason, so I wouldn't hold out any hope there

Anyway there already seem enough legal problems here without taking on the EAs as well, much as they might deserve it

EAs have to belong to a property redress scheme. If the EA particulars are misleading, the OP can take it to the ombudsman. They can award compensation for any losses. It's relatively simple and free.

Once a seller lies to me I pull out right away because the trust has gone and what else are they lying about.
i put an offer on a lovely Grade 2 property in the country and they told me they had certificates for ALL the work done on the house.
I wasted £800 on a full survey (because I'm not stupid) and the survey uncovered loads of work done on the house that had not been signed off and I could have been liable for thousands of pounds to put it right.
The estate agent and the seller were best friends and both of them lied through their teeth, I was disgusted.
That was it as far as I was concerned.

You're quite right, orangenasturtium, but my thinking was that it's just one more complication OP could probably do without

She could get redress in theory, but only after the EA's possible lies have been sorted out - and for a certainty they'll claim they were "just acting in good faith and passing on what they'd been told"

And the reviews for the Ombudsman (who are of course funded by the EAs themselves) will come as a surprise to nobody: uk.trustpilot.com/review/tpos.co.uk

Pull out and think about action to recover your costs due to sellers fraudulent misrepresentation to you (in relying upon you have incurred costs you wouldn’t have otherwise).
Or large réduction to reflect change but it doesn’t sound right. I too would keep your sale and rent.

Solicitors speak to the trust. Is there a deal to be done.

Reduce offer significantly to reflect smaller garden.

Either way keep your buyer. Sell. Move into rented if you have to. Much better position to be in when you buy that way.

A phone call to the trust can't hurt but I think you know you can't go ahead as is.

Pull out and think about action to recover your costs due to sellers fraudulent misrepresentation

I got the impression that, apart from the EA details which just said "garden", the rest was done verbally
If so, I wouldn't fancy OP's chances of building a case on something he'll certainly deny

I would be very wary. The Trust may be able to build on that land. It's amazing what you can cram on a small site. Our local council has been "rationalising" it's land holdings, which basically means checking out any bit of land they own, and seeing if it might be of interest to developers. This included the small triangle of land (double tennis court size) outside my house! Luckily it was too steep.