Buying a new build, concerned by party wall location

cocoa123

Hi, I am in the process of purchasing a new build house. The houses are still under construction, but the boundary wall separating our house and neighboring house is already in place. As it looks on the planning application site layout plan and selling agent's brochure our site is supposed to be 2.5m wider than neighbiring site. In fact it is an opposite, deviding wall takes 2.5m from us and neighboring site is now wider in 2.5m. Both my and neighboring sites are of triangle shape. I relized that yesterday, when measured the sites walls with measuring tape. The question is, how I make sure the wall has been placed in the correct place? Exprecced my thoughts to builder manager, I was expecting our conversation ending in one of two ways:

1.Oh, yes, yes on the planning appl site layout the location is different. No worries, we will move the wall to it's correct place.

2.Oh no, the deviding line on the planning appl site layout and brochure was wrong. The location on the ground is correct. Here is the correct, final and signed off layout plan. And he presents me the some other formal layout and proves he is correct.

Nothing of these actually happend. His answer was - you buy what it is, take it or leave it, we won't be moving walls, do not want clients moving on site taking measurements, that what you get and that's it. To be honest I was confused. I'm just an unexperienced first time buyer and foreigner, I do not know how it works in Ireland. Did I do something wrong? How I make sure, I get what I was expecting to get. It is important to me as I was planning to put side extention at some point in the future.

Gumbo

It is not a planning issue. It's s sight variation from the lodged site plan but still in compliance with the planning application.

Whoever buys the house, the land registry maps will show what's actually on the ground.

Don't go by the planning drawings. Go by the legal maps that come with he purchase pack.

Will it stop you buying the house?

cocoa123

If I still want the house? The house itself is OK, boring traditional layout that I personally dislike, now I am disappointed and do not know what to expect. I've been thinking that legal map is likely to follow the location on the ground, and coco planning layouts were simply inaccurate and misleading. Our house just 6m2 bigger than neighboring one but 45K more expensive. Was ready to go for it when the side had enough space for the future. Anyway, thanks for the replay, we will wait to see the fill contract pack with the legal mapping at our solicitor's office and then we decide. Thanks you.

Gumbo

cocoa123 wrote: »

If I still want the house? The house itself is OK, boring traditional layout that I personally dislike, now I am disappointed and do not know what to expect. I've been thinking that legal map is likely to follow the location on the ground, and coco planning layouts were simply inaccurate and misleading. Our house just 6m2 bigger than neighboring one but 45K more expensive. Was ready to go for it when the side had enough space for the future. Anyway, thanks for the replay, we will wait to see the fill contract pack with the legal mapping at our solicitor's office and then we decide. Thanks you.

It might be too late by then. Your Solicitor will be owed a considerable sum by then and it would be foolish to let it go that far and then back out.

What's on the ground is what you are buying, no amount of legal packs will change that. If you are not happy with the layout now, you will not be happy with the layout after the legal pack is issued.

As before, the planning site layouts are very close to accurate but will never be 100% due to the lay of the land, construction methods, there will always be slight variances.

cocoa123

I wouldn't call 2.5m of boundary mismatch "slight variances" . The planning application says that developer must to submit all sites boundaries to the coco planning before he starts building. That means that this info is already finalized and exists in coco planning. What's the point to submit it to planning if it's not valid and means nothing?

Gumbo

cocoa123 wrote: »

I wouldn't call 2.5m of boundary mismatch "slight variances" . The planning application says that developer must to submit all sites boundaries to the coco planning before he starts building. That means that this info is already finalized and exists in coco planning. What's the point to submit it to planning if it's not valid and means nothing?

Can you link me to that condition "The planning application says that developer must to submit all sites boundaries to the coco planning before he starts building" as I have never seen this on an application before. The Council usually do not get involved in civil boundaries (which this is one).

As someone who is involved in the planning process every working day of the week, it means nothing relatively speaking. The site boundaries on individual houses within an estate of houses will not be looked at from a planning perspective as long as minimum open spaces requirements are being met and that there is not material alterations that would impact on or injure adjoining properties in the area.

You are the buyer here, so if you don't like it, you buy another house. I honestly cant see a developer moving the boundaries now for one buyer, when there will be another behind you ready to buy *depending on location.

Where is the new estate?
You also have to remember that the plans that purchasers see are only indicative and are subject to change.

I cannot see a Local Authority doing anything here to be honest, it would not be worth the resources that Planning Enforcement proceedings would require, and I feel that the developer would win any case that the LA attempted to take to court if it even got that far.

cocoa123

Yes, that's true. Only legal mapping seems to reflect the final location. This is one of the pitfalls when buying property off plan.

muffler

I cant see you putting much of an extension on to the side of that house regardless of where the boundary wall is.

beauf

It's not an ideal layout for a future extensions if that was your plan.