Part of building on someone else's land

MuddyDog · 06-10-2015 10:13pm #1

Was looking at a house today. There is a garage separate to the house and it has been built for over 7 years but it lays partly outside the boundaries of the land. The land that it lays in is owned by the nearest neighbour. These neighbours are complaining and what the garage taken down. The house/garage was previously occupied by a relative of theirs and therefore they obviously didn't mind this infringement. Also, the garage has no planning permission whatsoever.

Legally, can the garage be knocked or if I applied for retention if I bought the property would I get it?

Markcheese · 06-10-2015 11:25pm

MuddyDog wrote: »

Was looking at a house today. There is a garage separate to the house and it has been built for over 7 years but it lays partly outside the boundaries of the land. The land that it lays in is owned by the nearest neighbour. These neighbours are complaining and what the garage taken down. The house/garage was previously occupied by a relative of theirs and therefore they obviously didn't mind this infringement. Also, the garage has no planning permission whatsoever.

Legally, can the garage be knocked or if I applied for retention if I bought the property would I get it?

That's a total balls up - if it's not already yours ,stay well away -
I doubt a bank would touch it (mortgage wise)

Peregrinus · 07-10-2015 1:10am

Planning and title are two completely separate things. If somebody disputes your title to a building, the dispute doesn't go away when you say "Look! I have retention permission!".

Could retention permission be got for this building? I don't know. Does it comply with building and planning codes, development plans, etc? It may well be that it could be got.

But the big issue is title. If A builds a garage partly on B's land then, to the extent that the garage is on B's land it doesn't belong to A; it belongs to B. So you don't even consider buying this garage unless everybody on whose land any part of the garage stands joins in the sale to you. It doesn't sound like that's going to happen.

Either you buy this property on the assumption that the garage is going to have to be removed (and you price your offer accordingly) or you walk away. I'd walk away, myself.

MarkAnthony · 07-10-2015 7:33am

This would very likely have to be a cash purchase as well. A bank might get involved with a mortgage but there will be quite a bit of hassle thrown in.

Markcheese · 07-10-2015 8:04am

If you applied for planning (or the current owner applied ) and if the garage is up to code - the neighbours (who's land it encroaches on and want it gone as well ) will object to granting of PP,

MuddyDog · 07-10-2015 8:19am

Who pays for it to be knocked down if it comes to that?

seamus · 07-10-2015 8:31am

People are ****ing incredible. "We didn't mind when it belonged to Billy, but if some feckin blow-in wants to buy it, they'll have to knock it".

Sounds like these neighbours would be a pain in the hole even if you did knock the garage.

In any case, if you were to make an offer, I'd make it on the condition that the current owner knocks the existing garage and clears away the rubble. As others have said, you won't get a mortgage otherwise, anyway.

In real terms I wonder is there any case for adverse possession or another implicit right since they have allowed the garage to stand without resistance this far.

nicol · 07-10-2015 8:37am

In terms of planning no bank would touch the property without planning permission being granted for the garage. The vendor really should have sorted this out before putting it on the market.

The same holds true for the title of the land on which the garage is built. The vendor should sort this out prior to putting it up for sale. Their estate agent should have advised them of this.

If it were me I'd walk away from it now, otherwise you'll just cause yourself all sorts of heartache trying to push the sale through, when it probably won't.

Markcheese · 07-10-2015 9:22am

MuddyDog wrote: »

Who pays for it to be knocked down if it comes to that?

Tricky really - it'd probably have to be by agreement - neighbours want it gone - partly on there site -
Where would planning permission retention fines go - it's part someone else's problem -

MarkAnthony · 07-10-2015 10:06am

seamus wrote: »

In real terms I wonder is there any case for adverse possession or another implicit right since they have allowed the garage to stand without resistance this far.

Very doubtful, it's not long enough and it looks like there was no AP in the first place as permission was given.

Open to correction as always.

MuddyDog · 07-10-2015 12:48pm

It'll be a cash sale with the highest bidder taking it. Buyer's are aware of the issues so if they are the winning bidder, they are aware of these potential issues down the line. High Risk situation but obviously potential of high reward if the neigbours just relent (which I personally think they will do)

07-10-2015 2:36pm

You could offer to buy the land the garage is on and add it to your site?

MuddyDog · 07-10-2015 2:38pm

Deleted User wrote: »

You could offer to buy the land the garage is on and add it to your site?

I'm sure the problematic neighbour who owns the land will quote a rather extortionate price.

Markcheese · 07-10-2015 7:54pm

MuddyDog wrote: »

It'll be a cash sale with the highest bidder taking it. Buyer's are aware of the issues so if they are the winning bidder, they are aware of these potential issues down the line. High Risk situation but obviously potential of high reward if the neigbours just relent (which I personally think they will do)

If they're gonna relent why would they go to the bother of kicking up a stink now-
And even if they don't bother going to court over the land issue - which if the map is right they'd probably win- they could just complain to the council about planning issue and the fines would start from then -if they object to planning it will delay and cost you - (and assuming it's built to code )
If it was just a money issue they'd have struck a deal with previous/ current owner who'd now have a much more sale able property-

Mr. Incognito · 08-10-2015 7:01am

Walk away. Lose lose.

MuddyDog · 08-10-2015 9:54am

Markcheese wrote: »

If they're gonna relent why would they go to the bother of kicking up a stink now-
And even if they don't bother going to court over the land issue - which if the map is right they'd probably win- they could just complain to the council about planning issue and the fines would start from then -if they object to planning it will delay and cost you - (and assuming it's built to code )
If it was just a money issue they'd have struck a deal with previous/ current owner who'd now have a much more sale able property-

Previous owner was their daughter and therefore it wasn't an issue since 2001.

MarkAnthony · 08-10-2015 10:02am

MuddyDog wrote: »

Previous owner was their daughter and therefore it wasn't an issue since 2001.

Are you sure it goes back further than 12 years?

While it would be very expensive and with no guarantees you might be able to challenge it on that basis.

Peregrinus · 08-10-2015 10:14am

Is the current vendor their daughter? 'Cause their attitude is sure buggering up her prospects of selling the house, to you or anyone else.

MarkAnthony · 08-10-2015 10:24am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Is the current vendor their daughter? 'Cause their attitude is sure buggering up her prospects of selling the house, to you or anyone else.

Sounds like a repo/forced sale?

seamus · 08-10-2015 10:25am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Is the current vendor their daughter? 'Cause their attitude is sure buggering up her prospects of selling the house, to you or anyone else.

Heh. From the other thread, the house was repossessed by the bank who are now attempting to sell it and are refusing to sell it back to the family of the original owner, who own the land surrounding it and have put in a lowball offer.

So they're doing a good job of ballsing up the sale for everyone else by the looks of it.

A wiley bank official might do well to offer the property for rent to "troubled" local council tenants for six months and the previous owners might cop on a bit and be only delighted to allow it to be sold after those six months.

MuddyDog · 08-10-2015 10:57am

House was built in 2001. Daughter lived in it until 2008 and it's been vacant since.

MuddyDog · 08-10-2015 11:20am

Markcheese wrote: »

If they're gonna relent why would they go to the bother of kicking up a stink now-
And even if they don't bother going to court over the land issue - which if the map is right they'd probably win- they could just complain to the council about planning issue and the fines would start from then -if they object to planning it will delay and cost you - (and assuming it's built to code )
If it was just a money issue they'd have struck a deal with previous/ current owner who'd now have a much more sale able property-

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Are you sure it goes back further than 12 years?

While it would be very expensive and with no guarantees you might be able to challenge it on that basis.

The house was built in 2001 and then the daughter left it in 2008 and it's been empty since.

MarkAnthony · 08-10-2015 6:30pm

MuddyDog wrote: »

The house was built in 2001 and then the daughter left it in 2008 and it's been empty since.

Probably want about €20K to get started and I don't think you could get good title to it, but you might be able to get them estopped (for want of the correct term) from knocking it down.

Consult a good solicitor and get a barrister instructed.

Peregrinus · 09-10-2015 1:26am

seamus wrote: »

Heh. From the other thread, the house was repossessed by the bank who are now attempting to sell it and are refusing to sell it back to the family of the original owner, who own the land surrounding it and have put in a lowball offer.

So they're doing a good job of ballsing up the sale for everyone else by the looks of it.

Oh, OK. So the bank has granted security over the property and is discovering, on trying to enforce their security, that the property has title and planning problems which make it unmarketable. Hilarity ensues.

OP, this property is not for you. You should run away screaming loudly. Better to drive knitting-needles through your eyeballs than every to look at it again.

Part of building on someone else's land

Comments