House for sale...but with “conditions”
Discussion
Good Evening all.
Firstly, I’m not sure if this is the correct place for this post - Mods please move if required.
I’m looking for a little clarity (and possibly guidance) in relation to a neighbouring (next door) property.
I’ve just discovered that my neighbour has listed her house for sale (and may already have sold it STC). My concern is that the property “enjoys the benefit” of a double stable at the end of the garden. This stable is quite large since it includes (according to the EA blurb) a hay barn: it’s L shaped and the dimensions are roughly 8m x 3.6m and over 4m in height in a garden no more than 25m x 4m. The stable is of wood construction, has power and light and is situated less than 500mm from my fence. The long dimension (8m) runs alongside my fence and garden, and the 3.6m extends across the full width of her garden finishing adjacent to a field.
I’m happy to give details and provide more background but for brevity, we objected to a retrospective planning application for this stable. The planning was eventually granted subject to a number of conditions, the main one was that the stable should ONLY house 2 alpacas.
Another condition (possibly not a condition as such but more of a standard requirement) was that the applicant would need to get the stable assessed for Building Regulations due to the nature of its construction, its size and its proximity to a boundary. We are very confident that the building has not been assessed and passed for Building Regs.
Finally, my query (phew!). The EA blurb clearly describes the stables. There is no reference to equestrian opportunities or any land for grazing or exercise. However, I’m still concerned that a potential buyer will see the property as “horse friendly” when, in fact, there are conditions attached to negate this.
Presumably, if this condition has been correctly attached, any search will throw this up? How can I assure myself that this will in fact happen. Also, likewise with Building Regs. Who should I approach (planning, Land Registry, EA?) to satisfy myself that all bases are covered so that I can rest easy in my bed? Finally, does our objection to her planning application and subsequent strained relationship constitute a “dispute” when my neighbour completes her information pack (or whatever it’s called), and if so, should we be made aware of this so we have an opportunity to put our “side”?
In summary, we’d be very happy to see the back of our neighbour and would welcome a fresh start with someone reasonable (ha ha) BUT would like to preempt any misconceptions that a potential buyer might have about the suitability of the property for an equestrian lifestyle. With apologies for the length of this post, I’d be grateful for any advice.
Firstly, I’m not sure if this is the correct place for this post - Mods please move if required.
I’m looking for a little clarity (and possibly guidance) in relation to a neighbouring (next door) property.
I’ve just discovered that my neighbour has listed her house for sale (and may already have sold it STC). My concern is that the property “enjoys the benefit” of a double stable at the end of the garden. This stable is quite large since it includes (according to the EA blurb) a hay barn: it’s L shaped and the dimensions are roughly 8m x 3.6m and over 4m in height in a garden no more than 25m x 4m. The stable is of wood construction, has power and light and is situated less than 500mm from my fence. The long dimension (8m) runs alongside my fence and garden, and the 3.6m extends across the full width of her garden finishing adjacent to a field.
I’m happy to give details and provide more background but for brevity, we objected to a retrospective planning application for this stable. The planning was eventually granted subject to a number of conditions, the main one was that the stable should ONLY house 2 alpacas.
Another condition (possibly not a condition as such but more of a standard requirement) was that the applicant would need to get the stable assessed for Building Regulations due to the nature of its construction, its size and its proximity to a boundary. We are very confident that the building has not been assessed and passed for Building Regs.
Finally, my query (phew!). The EA blurb clearly describes the stables. There is no reference to equestrian opportunities or any land for grazing or exercise. However, I’m still concerned that a potential buyer will see the property as “horse friendly” when, in fact, there are conditions attached to negate this.
Presumably, if this condition has been correctly attached, any search will throw this up? How can I assure myself that this will in fact happen. Also, likewise with Building Regs. Who should I approach (planning, Land Registry, EA?) to satisfy myself that all bases are covered so that I can rest easy in my bed? Finally, does our objection to her planning application and subsequent strained relationship constitute a “dispute” when my neighbour completes her information pack (or whatever it’s called), and if so, should we be made aware of this so we have an opportunity to put our “side”?
In summary, we’d be very happy to see the back of our neighbour and would welcome a fresh start with someone reasonable (ha ha) BUT would like to preempt any misconceptions that a potential buyer might have about the suitability of the property for an equestrian lifestyle. With apologies for the length of this post, I’d be grateful for any advice.
ClaphamGT3 said:
Objection to a planning application is not a neighbour dispute that has to be declared when selling.
If you are concerned about building regs compliance, contact the building control department at your local authority.
Thanks for that CGT3. Everything has (mostly) been above board. We just don’t acknowledge each other’s existence. :-)If you are concerned about building regs compliance, contact the building control department at your local authority.
Sebring440 said:
Why did you object? What were you objecting to?
Going forward, what is your concern now?
Well I could go into reams of details...but suffice to say the Planning dept imposed conditions on the (use and installation of the)building. The fact that it is restricted to just 2 alpacas implies that other livestock cannot use it (because its location makes that unsuitable). Obviously, it’s subjective but we feel that it’s location in a small residential garden (albeit in a rural village) is overbearing and unsuitable.Going forward, what is your concern now?
Going forward, we have no concerns if the new buyer replaces the present livestock with two different alpacas (what would be the chances of that happening?) however we are concerned that the property is/has been marketed as suitable for equestrian use...and we don’t want to go through another draining experience trying to stop that. I’d rather be sure of my ground (having sought assurance from the correct sources) to be able to say to any new buyer “Welcome to the neighbourhood...but don’t even think of bringing Dobbin to stay”. Hope that’s clear. :-)
gazza285 said:
Durzel said:
As an idiot - why would it necessarily be a problem if it was used for equestrian purposes rather than specifically alpacas? Am I missing something about the intrinsic serenity of alpacas?
Horse s
t stinks.
Get a friend to pose as a buyer and when in the garden,have them make enthusiastic horsey noises..."Oooh, that stable would be perfect for Gluestick and TescoLasgne!" If neighbours don't mention it's for freaky sheep only you'll know there might be problems.
They can also ask about Building Regs if you can't get information from the council
They can also ask about Building Regs if you can't get information from the council
db said:
It's not just horse st that stinks in the countryside. Slurry spreading anyone?
Nailed much more succinctly than I could put it...with all the attendant pests, muck heap etc.t that stinks in the countryside. Slurry spreading anyone?Out walking the dog, I can smell a horse/rider approach from quite some considerable distance. Having a lounge and main bedroom situated 12m from their stable is not ideal.
Thanks.
One of my mates has a family that is into the horsey thing. Buying selling riding jumping all that. They are lucky that my mate is the only neighbour, always on the roads so no fun driving, and lots of old horse trucks at all times. Apparently, there's money in horses if you don't like them only to trade, hence why my mate and his wife are broke.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff