Another boundary / title plan issue

[4Q]

My son has just purchased his first house and all went well however he didn't notice at the time but the neighbour seems to have annexed some of his garden.

I've purchased the title plans in case we are mistaken but something isn't quite right

This is the plan for my sons house showing that the boundary line ties in with the split in the two semis. Title plan DY356506 if anyone with better access can see what's going on?



This is the next door neighbours showing the boundary stepped back slightly from my sons house, no real issue so far.


However the neighbour has annexed the area in blue right over the boundary and past the end wall of his kitchen and built a shed.






Is there any way to check that the title plan is correct and if that little piece has been sold?

[tjdixon911]

I'm not sure I can help a great deal, but the redline area indicates it to be your Son's land, the redline on the neighbouring property excludes it... I've not moved for a while but would expect some sort of history (as to the sale of this land would exist?

We had a similar issue with boundaries on ours, our garden (physical boundary) was greater than the title suggested and the neighbouring properties boundaries were correct (making a section of our garden no man's land) - we had to have an indemnity policy in place (paid for by the seller) and then make a claim to the land (this was 13years or so ago), after 12 years it became ours.

I don't know if there is a check you can do to see if the neighbouring property has made this claim? Can't see how they can as any search would show it's your son's... Was this not questioned during purchase?

[Equus]

There is a gap between the registered titles (ie. the 'little piece' is unregistered, so no way of telling from online records which of the two properties owns it... it will take 'manual' investigation of records). You need to speak to your Solicitor, to get them to look into and resolve it with the Land Registry.

[4Q]

Thanks Equus for looking. I don't really care about the bit that isn't registered, he has come 2m over my sons boundary as well!

Edited to add: to where the green line is

Edited by 4Q on Wednesday 29th April 16:46

[No ideas for a name]

Equus said:

There is a gap between the registered titles (ie. the 'little piece' is unregistered, so no way of telling from online records which of the two properties owns it... it will take 'manual' investigation of records). You need to speak to your Solicitor, to get them to look into and resolve it with the Land Registry.

But... regardless of that little strip, it looks like the neighbour has pinched the part behind the new owners kitchen.
The slightly tapered wedgie bit above is the bit left when you look at the two title plans posted by the OP.

Edit: OP beat me to it with the same point.

[paulrockliffe]

If you get the land back you'll have fun arguing over exactly where the boundary intersects the end boundary, your plan shows it's in the middle of the properties, but it's kinked over to your neighbour's side as it goes to the end of the gardens.

[Lotobear]

The usual path to an answer is to examine the pre registration deed plans or those from the first conveyance (if available).

[quinny100]

The problem is people tend to red edge to the plot boundaries as shown on OS MasterMap - but they are just someone at the Ordnance Survey's interpretation of what they can see on the ground, more often that not from an aerial photograph these days. If there are trees or heavy planting on the boundary there's every chance the boundaries on the base map won't be accurate or even reflect where fence lines are positioned accurately.

From the very limited information here, it looks like potentially your son's plot boundary is possibly overstated on the plan as the boundary line kinks towards the neighbours property, and the neighbours is understated leading to small unregistered bit.

I'd urge extreme caution before getting involved in a boundary dispute. Nobody ever wins as such - you either end up spending a lot of money, falling out with your neighbours big time, or both.

Is there any evidence that there has been any recent changes to the boundary treatments? If it looks like its been this way for many years there's more chance the paperwork is wrong than any land grab having taken place.

[4Q]

paulrockliffe said:

If you get the land back you'll have fun arguing over exactly where the boundary intersects the end boundary, your plan shows it's in the middle of the properties, but it's kinked over to your neighbour's side as it goes to the end of the gardens.

Straight down the middle would be fine with us, it just seems to be taking the piss a little bit but obviously the previous owner didn’t care, or didn’t know as it’s been a rental for a few years.

Edited by 4Q on Wednesday 29th April 17:17

[4Q]

quinny100 said:

The problem is people tend to red edge to the plot boundaries as shown on OS MasterMap - but they are just someone at the Ordnance Survey's interpretation of what they can see on the ground, more often that not from an aerial photograph these days. If there are trees or heavy planting on the boundary there's every chance the boundaries on the base map won't be accurate or even reflect where fence lines are positioned accurately.

From the very limited information here, it looks like potentially your son's plot boundary is possibly overstated on the plan as the boundary line kinks towards the neighbours property, and the neighbours is understated leading to small unregistered bit.

I'd urge extreme caution before getting involved in a boundary dispute. Nobody ever wins as such - you either end up spending a lot of money, falling out with your neighbours big time, or both.

Is there any evidence that there has been any recent changes to the boundary treatments? If it looks like its been this way for many years there's more chance the paperwork is wrong than any land grab having taken place.

The piece in dispute literally comes across the full width of rear of the kitchen so it’s unlikely to have been that way from the outset and merely mis-drawn.

[ChrisNic]

It sounds like the purchase has completed, how did it not come up previously?

One of the first things the solicitors have done for our purchases has sent a copy of the deeds and sought to confirm they reflect what we believe we are buying.

[4Q]

ChrisNic said:

It sounds like the purchase has completed, how did it not come up previously?

One of the first things the solicitors have done for our purchases has sent a copy of the deeds and sought to confirm they reflect what we believe we are buying.

Because unless you ventured out in to the overgrown garden it wasn’t obvious. Now the better weather is here and some outside work has been done you can see the issue.

[fat80b]

It’s a shame this wasn’t spotted before exchange etc.

My solicitor pushed me to go and walk round the boundary with a copy of the plan to make sure that what we were purchasing matched what we thought we were purchasing.
It was only on doing this we spotted three potential boundary issues that needed explaining /sorting before we could exchange.

I would now advise everyone to do the same and be very methodical in checking the real boundaries against the plan.

In this case, I think it might be a tricky conversation with the neighbour now as the best first option - Especially with the shed in place.
You need to establish what the neighbour thinks is the ownership position of both the missing strip and the bit across your sons kitchen.

It may be that he thinks he purchased it somewhere along the line.

[Chrisgr31]

Could we have some photos on the ground of the area concerned? However seems fairly clear that the neighbour has grabbed some land.

Now for my own boundary issue which I could just do with a general plan of the area like the one Equus showed earlier. My plan is SX79428 . The garden goes down to a point at the end. On the ground the point is actually about 9 ft wide.

There was a birch tree on this boundary and potentially my side of it. Over the winter said birch tree came down in to the garden at the other end of the point. Whilst discussing it with the neighbours those who garden comes down on to the left hand side of the end of my garden (plan SX76127 ) said that when they bought there house their conveyancer told them there was an unregistered piece of land at the end of their garden. They were implying I was annexing it, but werent too concerned about it.

I am just interested to know where this piece of unregistered land is. I guess its the land where my tree fell as I couldnt find that one!

Any chance of posting a plan of the area?

[Equus]

quinny100 said:

The problem is ....

This is an excellent and very sensible post.

It's far more likely that there has been a plotting error than any sort of 'land grab', but in any event it's not going to endear you to your new neighbours and the neighbourhood in general to go in all guns blazing.

Chrisgr31 said:

I am just interested to know where this piece of unregistered land is....

Any chance of posting a plan of the area?

I'm guessing it's the two bits where the black lines (feint, under the pink tint, which represent hard boundaries as shown on Ordnance Survey mapping data) don't match the red lines, where titles SX79248 and SX78355 meet, but the bits of land appear to have now been reconciled into the two titles... there is no unregistered land remaining:

[Chrisgr31]

Equus said:

I'm guessing it's the two bits where the black lines (feint, under the pink tint, which represent hard boundaries as shown on Ordnance Survey mapping data) don't match the red lines, where titles SX79248 and SX78355 meet, but the bits of land appear to have now been reconciled into the two titles... there is no unregistered land remaining:

Thanks interesting. If there is any come back on the tree falling through the neighbours shed I think I will use that plan to deny it was my tree! According to that plan it wasn't my tree! Best wait for the shed to be rebuilt before I put any fence up.

[blueg33]

So many threads on titles where people haven’t inspected the boundaries before buying.

I think it should be taught at school!

[Equus]

blueg33 said:

So many threads on titles where people haven’t inspected the boundaries before buying.

I think it should be taught at school!

One of the most basic checks that any developer will do when looking at a site for purchase is to obtain all neighbouring land titles and reconcile them with the topographical survey (= careful visual check on the ground, if you're a private buyer of a house), each other, and all easements and rights of way across the land.

Most solicitors can barely read a plan, and don't routinely check this stuff, anyway.

Come on, guys, you wouldn't buy a £5K car (I hope) without careful visual checks to make sure it looks straight, and checking the chassis numbers against the docs. This is the basic equivalent, so why on earth are you willing to commit to a purchase of £several hundred thousand without it?

[PostHeads123]

I had simular - in my case though I owned the neighbours house with the extra bit of garden, it only became an issue when someone bought what is your son's house and thought I had knicked part of the garden based on land reg docs.

In my case the land registry had screwed up the person I bought the house off had legally bought part of my neighbours garden off them, my land reg doc referred to xx house and land at back but the land at back had a seperate title deed to house, the neighbours title doc showed it as still owned by them. The sale of the extra land had happened in the days before computers so a screw up somewhere, I was lucky as the seller of the neighbours house were able to confirm it was bought legitimately. If possible ask your sons sellers what the score is with the land.

Edited by PostHeads123 on Wednesday 29th April 23:04

[anonymous-user]

blueg33 said:

So many threads on titles where people haven’t inspected the boundaries before buying.

I think it should be taught at school!

Then someone lies, moves an old fence, pulls up a few identifying trees and lies again prior to a site visit and nicks a few metres.

I've got some grade A ahole neighbours