Who owns the outbuilding? Help!!!

[Propertyadvice99]

Morning mumnetters

I'm seeking some advice from the collective wisdom of Mumsnet. I also want to sense check that I'm not going mad. I'll try to get as much info as possible in the opening post so strap yourselves in.

We (partner and I) purchased a Victorian semi detached house a few years ago. It's a standard Victorian layout with 2 reception rooms and kitchen at the back. It's the third Victorian semi that I've owned and they've all had a brick outhouse to the rear of the kitchen. In the other properties it was attached to the house. In this one it is a few feet from the house. The outhouse in this property (as with the others) is attached to an outhouse in our attached neighbour's property. So far so good - standard Victorian set-up.

Once we moved in we had a look in the outhouse (it is accessed through a door which faces the back of our house) and noticed that the rear half was bricked up. We thought that was odd but these are old houses so didn't think much too it and planned to open it up at some point for extra storage.

A few months later and I was collecting a ball from our attached neighbour's garden (with their permission) and saw that the rear of their outhouse had been opened up to give them access to what we thought was our property.

Checked the deeds and the boundary line goes straight down the garden following the fence and the ridge line of the outbuilding roof. What they accessing is clearly in our garden.

We mentioned it a couple of times but we had a baby they had 4 babies(!) and we didn't want to bother then as we know what a stressful time it is.

Our new year's resolution was to get it sorted as we think it could be a problem if we wanted to sell in the future as any potential buyers might want to knock down or renovate the outbuildings.

I sent out neighbour a very nice message asking for a chat about it and got a very snotty message back. They claim that the outhouses have always been this way and refuse to discuss further.

Sone further info:

• I have downloaded their deeds from land registry and they show the same as ours - a straight boundary line.
• the land registry deeds do not show the outhouses.
• their is no record of boundary changes or easements etc giving them right to access.
• the outhouse has a tiled roof. If tiles came off on the bit that they claim they own they would have to access our property to undertake repairs.
• the bricks that have been used to block up the side look newer than the bricks used to build the outhouse and the grout looks more recent - suggesting that the outhouse was not built like this.
• the properties were under common ownership at some point in the past (but not for decades).

My thinking is that we right them a letter explaining that it is on our property according to the deeds and giving them a deadline to demonstrate that they have legal ownership. If they don't do this then we will look to reinstate the boundary (i.e. unblock our side and brick up theirs). Or invite them to remove the part which is in our garden and rebuild on their own property.

Does this sound reasonable? Has anyone experienced something similar and been able to resolve without an expensive and stressful legal dispute?

I know that diagrams are like catnip to Mumsnet users so I'll attach below.

@PepeParapluie that's great advice, very clear and super helpful. And thanks for the link!

It's not on the Land Registry so I would be getting in touch with them for a little chat in the first place.
We moved into a renovation project in which an old building was divided into new dwellings. The Land Registry bloke came round with a clipboard. He allocated bits of land to the various households and was eminently sensible in his decisions.

Honestly you can mess around trying to discuss with them for the next few years or you can just get a builder in and move the wall.
It's clearly your land. You wouldn't be asking for their permission for any other part of your land. They're not going to spend thousands taking you to court when the deeds show its yours. They'll get nowhere, also 4 babies they're probably too busy to bother.

The deeds DO NOT show that the outbuilding/s belong to one or another property, according to the OP.

They are not shown at all, hence the now very muddy water.

I think you need to get some specialist legal advice. They might actually go ahead with an adverse possession claim, which would be a nightmare. Maybe they would accept an agreement that they can continue to use it for a peppercorn rent so you can end it when they move out. I can’t see that it has much impact on increasing the value of the property so maybe there objection is more about wanting the storage space so that might be a compromise that they would agree to as it they won’t want a boundary dispute either but might risk it rather than lose use of the shed. It sounds like they will want to fight for it…

I once lived in a Victorian property where there were formally communal outbuildings at the end of the gardens. The buildings had been split to follow internal walls so the boundaries were irregular and the gardens had odd chunks out of them IYSWIM. There were blocked up doors between the properties in the outbuildings that were still standing. The deeds did reflect that but the outbuildings aren’t on your deeds.

I think this could be quite complicated as the buildings are clearly very old but aren’t on the deeds. The neighbour could be correct that the store has been blocked off to your property and their property has used it for a very long time, if not always.

it's not muddy at all. The deeds clearly show the boundary and everything on the OP's side of the boundary is theirs unless clearly specified otherwise - which it isn't.

The structure doesn’t need to be shown on the deeds though - it’s on OP’s land. If you build a shed in your garden, it doesn’t need to be added to your deeds for you to prove it’s yours - it’s in your garden! If someone else builds a shed in your garden, their shed is trespassing and you could take action against them.

Sure there might be defences or counterclaims here based on the length of time or adverse possession, but the fact the outbuilding isn’t on the plan doesn’t change the extent of the land OP currently owns.

If you have put it to her you believe it is your space you are already 'in dispute' and both you and her should really disclose it on the forms in the event of a sale. The best thing now is to resolve the dispute so you can reassure buyers it's not going to be a problem for them if they buy the house.

It's not the ownership of the land that is in question, as I understand the opening post.

Owning land does not prevent others having even stronger rights over it, as many a landowner who couldn't divert or extinguish a right of way has discovered, along with chancel liability and as pp correctly mentions 'defences or counterclaims' which is why I counselled caution.

Is there any way to disprove her reasoning that they have always been like that?
For example are there were neighbouring properties built with the same design around the same time?
It seems bizarre that their part of the shed is on your land, but similarly I can never understand how things like flying freeholds were ever agreed.

Honestly I would just give them notice that the outbuildings on your land and therefore you wish to use the entirety of your property. They may have had permission from the previous owner but you are now revoking it. Tell them to Please remove your stuff by xxxxx date and warn them that you will be bringing a builder on xxxx date to move the wall.

put the ball completely in their court to get legal advice and dispute. If it turns out they have a legitimate case you’ll soon find out but my money is either a) they don’t or b) not worth the hassle to sort.

Thanks @LumpyandBumps - I think it's definitely something to consider. I wonder if a surveyor could advice whether the bricks are a later addition?
It would be useful to have a look in the disputed bit and see if there's evidence of a wall having been removed but I suspect that they won't agree to that.

Talk with her, not text. You interpret it as haughty, whereas I interpreted it as trying to be conciliatory, trying to say 'its ok, this has never caused problems'. Text is a nightmare for people misinterpreting intentions and meanings.

And if you haven't actually talked to them, don't start giving notice etc. That would be escalating the situation and cause a dispute with a neighbour that would have to be declared on sale, when an adult conversation might resolve things to everyone's satisfaction.

Just a thought - can join go on zoopla and look at the sold price for that house if it was relatively recent. Often the previous listing is put on there and so you can see the photos plus the floor plan that was on there at the time it was sold.

@FindusMakesPancakes - I did try and talk to her! My original message asked if we could have a chat about it. Her reply said that they considered it resolved and that there was nothing further to discuss. I have tried and absolutely agree this would be the best way forward. PS. The rest of her message that I didn't include was pretty haughty!

I would just ask your neighbours. I don't think this is straightforward. The other 3/4 could belong to them. It depends on the historical use of the building. You would be really petty to knock that bit down just because it's ok your land and you would probably end up with a tiny unstable bit of building.

What's the thing on the roof? Is it a window? Or ventilation?

Just to put a fly in your ointment. We have had a similar problem with my DP’s house. They lived there over 40 years, before land was all register at the Land Registry. The Land Registry made a complete pigs ear of the registration when they did all the village. An outhouse, only accessible to my parents and on the estate agents details and the survey at purchase as belonging to my parents, was allocated to next door, as it is attached to their house.

Luckily next door are not grabby and were prepared to do a deed of rectification to correct it. If they had decided “it’s on my land according to the mess the Land Registry so it’s mine”, it would have cost thousands to correct - via court. The Land Registry is not always correct.

get the older conveyancing documentation and contact previous owners, to find out who it should belong to.

I think you will find that at some point in the past, two former owners came to an agreement, perhaps money changed hands in some form of an informal sale but the title plans weren't updated.

I would go back to your original surveyor and suggested they missed this and what their advise now would be.

Could you say to your neighbour that you are planning on removing the outhouse or redoing it and letting them know you will be putting up a fence down your property line as per the deeds? Or you are removing the back bricks to give you more space and will be re rocking the outhouse side wall and taking back what they have claimed?

@Geneticsbunny - it's ventilation. Either side of the brick wall that separates the part of the building that is sited on our garden.

Surely when it was originally built, it would have been one half privy and the other half a coal store

There could theoretically be historic transactions, old deeds which show this set up is the original etc etc etc like PPs are suggesting but it’s up to the neighbours to prove that and run around finding evidence of that (which is still binding despite not having been registered) - OP is entitled to rely on the register as conclusive. So if OP wants to take that bit back by legal action or more drastic practical action, or by speaking to the neighbour, she’s entitled to do that and it’s for the neighbour to come up with whatever explanation that it should stay this way despite that not matching the legal title.

Thanks so much everyone. There has been some really good and constructive advice on this thread. I showed it to a non-mumsnet friend and she was very impressed!
@Drfosters - great idea to check Zoopla. It turns out that they briefly put their property on the market about a year ago (when they mentioned moving to my partner). So it might be worth holding tight and being open to discuss it as it is more important to them to get it sorted if they are looking to sell. It didn't have any details on outbuildings but the property outside of their boundary was greyed out on the aerial photo and the greyed out bit included the disputed outhouse (if that makes sense). I know it's just an estate agent photo but I thought it was interesting!

For clarification to some of the negative comments. We're not being grabby or trying to pick fights over a small bit of land. If that was the case we would have done something in the several years that we've lived here. We didn't even realise next door were using it for several months! We have tried to be considerate because of their personal situation and have only raised it casually before and recently asked if we could have a chat. I found it a rather bold statement from the neighbours that it had been like that since the beginning of time and that no purchaser would ever have a problem with it.

For context we live in an area that is expensive comparative to the region and almost all of the Victorian houses have massive extensions. We have a small one and to make it bigger or install a garden office etc you would need to remove the outhouse that is sitting within our boundary!!!! Not being able to do this would affect the resale value and attractiveness of the house. We didn't benefit from this when we bought the house as we didn't know and weren't made aware.
Also I don't think I posted anywhere that I was intending to pull it down so that was quite a leap from @Geneticsbunny!!!