Buying a house - Next door roof 'trespasses' our boundary

[Dr Murdoch]

Nope as far as i'm aware it 'adjoins' our roof rather than invades, but without a survey/inspection myself I do not know.

I'm only going on what can be seen on the photos above....unless I go for a full blown survey.

p.s Thanks Deesee, I'll see what my solicitor comes back with tomorrow!

[Douglas Quaid]

The pictures aren’t too clear but did the original owner of your house build an annex onto the house and then sell this as a separate house?

[Easternlight]

I'm struggling to see how the front and rear views are the same house.
Front view looks pretty normal annex with angled roof, but can't see how it's a seperate property?
The rear looks like a flat roof annex joining a house with more roof joints and angles than I've ever seen before?
Flat roofs are trouble IMHO and that lot would have me looking for another property.
Edit
looking at he overhead view I can see it now.
Looks like it's had 4 or 5 additions all with different roofs.
Not trying to pee on your chips OP but that looks like a muddle to me and if its some how two property's even worse.

Any chance of a rightmove link?

Edited by Easternlight on Tuesday 21st August 20:19

[V8RX7]

Dr Murdoch said:

Its basically an annex on the side (see photo below), this was built in circa 1960 and the dormer was built in 1988. In terms of land registry they are two separate dwellings.



I was just about to instruct a surveyor to undertake a full survey (£1.1k), i'm holding off at the moment or would it be best just to get them to do it and advise accordingly? I'm not sure what other professionals I can call upon?

Also, we hope to buy the annex at some point, but clearly this cannot be considered a certainty....

I'd suggest asking for a written reply from your solicitor about all the possible problems it could cause, I'd ask a Surveyor the same BEFORE he is paid to carry out a full survey.

I'd then get a home insurance quote again specifically mentioning that it was an annex and the roof situation.

I'd also be looking at the Planning history etc

I'm intrigued what your buying criteria is, that the best answer was "this house"

[paulrockliffe]

It's hard to tell on the pics, but is the roof done like that to avoid having a valley between yours and theirs?

If it's just the roof detail, they may have no right over the space inside the roof and it might be that the not over your roof is actually your roof too. Just modified to make a better match.

Is there any documentation around the addition?

[Dr Murdoch]

It appears to have been built/designed to avoid a gully. maybe aesthetically it looks better as well as it blends in.

[Equus]

V8RX7 said:

However if it is as you describe then I know enough to know that you need professional advice on all the potential issues.

Maintenance, insurance, liability - how it was built re fire risk etc

Aside from the legal issues (make yourself familar with the Party Wall Act and the Access to Neighbouring Land Act), this would be the first and most obvious technical concern I'd have.

If it was originally built as an annex/extension to the main house, it may not have been firestopped where their roof overlaps yours.... which might also mean that the acoustic separation is not up to snuff, either.

[soupdragon1]

Equus said:

Aside from the legal issues (make yourself familar with the Party Wall Act and the Access to Neighbouring Land Act), this would be the first and most obvious technical concern I'd have.

If it was originally built as an annex/extension to the main house, it may not have been firestopped where their roof overlaps yours.... which might also mean that the acoustic separation is not up to snuff, either.

Yes, make sure you are going in with your eyes wide open.

The key point for me, is don't let this stuff put you off. If you really like the house, go for it.

A good survey will highlight the quality and any potential issues and as long as you aware of what could happen down the line should an issue crop up, then you are going in with your eyes wide open. Lets face it, every house on the planet has potential issues down the road. Doesn't matter if its detached, terraced or whatever - roofs can leak down the line or you could have a boundary dispute down the line etc...no house anywhere is free from potential trouble.

The key thing is to get it all in perspective. Yes, this particular house might seem a little bit more awkward than a typical semi, but as long as its been built well - there shouldn't be too much to worry about.

[Dr Murdoch]

V8RX7 said:

I'm intrigued what your buying criteria is, that the best answer was "this house"

Schools, area, size of house, 'feel', garden, driveway, garage.

Thanks for all the responses so far, I'm putting together an e-mail to my solicitor now. If anyone has any specific questions that I should ask please feel free to post!

Thanks again for all your help chaps

[rich350z]

V8RX7 said:

I'm intrigued what your buying criteria is, that the best answer was "this house"

This?

Good luck.

Answer above thanks.

Edited by rich350z on Wednesday 22 August 09:33

[surveyor]

Some good advice, some less good advice as ever.

Ask your solicitor for more specific advice, and alert your surveyor before he goes around..

I would also say this is not trespass, but encroachment

[Equus]

V8RX7 said:

What's the history because it looks like an extended single house, not a semi.

Dr Murdoch said:

Its basically an annex on the side (see photo below), this was built in circa 1960 and the dormer was built in 1988. In terms of land registry they are two separate dwellings.

surveyor said:

I would also say this is not trespass, but encroachment

It would be interesting to know when it came into use as a separate dwelling (ie. when the separate LR title was created).

I agree with V8RX7 that by the look of it, it was originally built as an extension/annexe to the house, and later separated off as an individual dwelling. If this was after the dormer was built in 1988, it may be that there is no encroachment at all - the 'parent' dwelling would simply own and be responsible for that part of the dormer structure that sits above its own roof?

[Dr Murdoch]

I believe it became separate entity in 1960, the dormer was approved in 1988. Apologies I thought it was built in 1960, but it appears much earlier.

Begs the question whether it was raised as an issue for those buying/selling the annex within the last 30 years.

Edited by Dr Murdoch on Wednesday 22 August 10:36

[Dr Murdoch]

Title plan 1966

[Dr Murdoch]

Quick update:

Sent my solicitor this yesterday:

In a nutshell we both want to try and make this work.

1. However, should we tell our lender of this situation (even though they have undertaken a survey)?
2. Can we bat this back to the sellers/solicitors court and make it their problem to resolve?
3. Worst case, could an agreement be considered by all three parties (us, 9a and 9) to share the cost of remedial work to ensure that this issue is nipped in the bud and that this sale goes through without further delay? (I'm thinking of terminating the roof at the boundary line and creating a gully for drainage)
4. Are there any other viable options that allows us to buy the property but covers our backs? Indemnity insurance? Flying freehold agreement?

Lastly, we have the sellers direct contact details and have in fact previously met the seller in person. If it would help by us speaking to the seller directly please let me/us know.

And the reply:

"The issues are either not resolvable or are not easily resolvable."

Slight (v slight) glimmer of hope, I'm due to speak to him later.

[Deesee]

Dr Murdoch said:

Quick update:

Sent my solicitor this yesterday:

In a nutshell we both want to try and make this work.

1. However, should we tell our lender of this situation (even though they have undertaken a survey)?

Yes, can't see them liking it.

2. Can we bat this back to the sellers/solicitors court and make it their problem to resolve?

You could and possibly run up £0,000's in costs, and get no where.

3. Worst case, could an agreement be considered by all three parties (us, 9a and 9) to share the cost of remedial work to ensure that this issue is nipped in the bud and that this sale goes through without further delay? (I'm thinking of terminating the roof at the boundary line and creating a gully for drainage).

Perhaps, but you would need to overcome 1 & 2 first.

4. Are there any other viable options that allows us to buy the property but covers our backs? Indemnity insurance? Flying freehold agreement?

Yes,but don't think your lender will be happy with that.

Lastly, we have the sellers direct contact details and have in fact previously met the seller in person. If it would help by us speaking to the seller directly please let me/us know.

And the reply:

"The issues are either not resolvable or are not easily resolvable."

Slight (v slight) glimmer of hope, I'm due to speak to him later.

if you like the area (street), get a flyer knocked up stating your intentions to buy in the area, and post in that street/area, following the reply id walk away (or negotiate a sizeable discount).

[V8RX7]

If you haven't significantly shortened your solicitor's reply, I'd get another solicitor.

There must be ways to overcome this it can't be the first time it's happened.