Boundary Issue

alicat1606

I am in the process of buying a house. My Surveyor noticed a discrepancy of 2.5 metres along two sides of the boundary as to what was on the maps (the map was shorter than the physical boundary).
Now the original house is around 100 years old, the site is 1 acre and the boundary is lined with trees and hedges which have always been there.

My solicitor forwarded on this information to the vendors solicitor to ensure that they get the maps rectified, and the response was no, the house/land is sold as seen. My solicitor is adament that this needs to be rectified, as quite rightly we need to know we own all the land especially if we ever build anything near the boundary.

Upon reading similar threads I know the maps aren't always accurate especially as they are now digital, but is this something that can be rectified? 2.5 metres along two sides of an acre piece of land is quite a large amount and we would need the maps to reflect this.

Thanks in advance.

Figerty

Buy nothing without the maps and title being correct. The land registry maps are the key thing. Unless your land maps are right you can forget ever selling it again.
I know someone in that position. Don't get caught in it.

Go on to the OSI website. The old maps are there. It's possible the boundary was moved.

alicat1606

Thanks for your reply. My surveyor checked all the maps and the discrepancy is definately there. It's annoying because the current owners bought the house 3 years ago and their surveyor and solicitor at the time never picked up on this.

handlemaster

alicat1606 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply. My surveyor checked all the maps and the discrepancy is definately there. It's annoying because the current owners bought the house 3 years ago and their surveyor and solicitor at the time never picked up on this.

Or so they say

Figerty

2.5 metres is wide enough to put an access road down beside you later on.

MarkAnthony

Can be rectified in any number of ways. Adverse possession is one way but I simply mention this for all the people that give out about squatters rights and the fact that they have no place etc.

Is there a mortgage, is the bank okay with the boundary issue? It can be rectified through the land registry but it's far from a quick process.

the_syco

alicat1606 wrote: »

It's annoying because the current owners bought the house 3 years ago and their surveyor and solicitor at the time never picked up on this.

I think you're reading this wrongly. IMO, it's not a case of "can it be fixed?", but more like "someone who bought it three years ago now wants to sell it as is, without having fixed it". That, IMO, is a warning sign.

martinr5232

Any update on this op i know someone with a similar issue.

alicat1606

Still negotiating this! My solicitor has asked them to get a deed of rectification done which would be the only way the sale can go ahead. Still waiting on their response...

Figerty

alicat1606 wrote: »

Still negotiating this! My solicitor has asked them to get a deed of rectification done which would be the only way the sale can go ahead. Still waiting on their response...

You would be better off without it than own it with a dodgy title.

Rabbo

2.5m is only 1mm on a standard 1:2500 scale map and is probably within a reasonable margin of error on such a map. Are you sure your surveyor and solicitor aren't making a mountain out of a molehill? The PRA maps are indicative only and not conclusive. Is this strip close to the house, entrance or services?

Figerty

In practice, the boundaries are on local features such as wall, drains road boundaries. The maps are very accurate. We can thank the Brits for that. Based on acreage of fields as much as walls.

If there was a strip 2.5 meters wide between the boundaries it would be mapped and recorded.

Put it this way. If the 2.5 metres crept into the neighbours place and you tired to claim it, then it would be shotguns at dawn

Rabbo

I'm afraid the maps aren't very accurate in a lot of places since they were digitised 6-7 years ago.

It's true that the old 25" OSI maps were generally very reliable considering the tools the surveyors had in the early 1900s when they drew them up.
The maps have since been updated largely with aerial photography and anyone that is involved in mapping will tell you that they find a lot of inconsistencies in these, especially where there is any tree cover overhead which obviously doesn't suit aerial surveying.

Figerty

Rabbo wrote: »

I'm afraid the maps aren't very accurate in a lot of places since they were digitised 6-7 years ago.

It's true that the old 25" OSI maps were generally very reliable considering the tools the surveyors had in the early 1900s when they drew them up.
The maps have since been updated largely with aerial photography and anyone that is involved in mapping will tell you that they find a lot of inconsistencies in these, especially where there is any tree cover overhead which obviously doesn't suit aerial surveying.

It will still go back to the land registry maps in the folio for the land for definition on the boundaries. This one sounds screwed up or someone being very cute.
Of course boundaries can have moved and things change but the legal side of it is of the utmost importance.