Get UK Law Questions Answered by Verified Experts
Don't worry about your English, sometimes I struggle with it as well!
Is it possible for you to let me have a copy of the land registry deeds? Iwould need the deeds and the plan?
The reason is that if the property is freehold the covenant to erect afence only applies to either the original buyer at the time of the covenant 20years ago, or to any subsequent buyers (including you) if each subsequent buyercovenanted in turn.
That is why I would need to see the deeds. You can attach them, or emailthem to me if you can confirm that you can scan them.
You may actually have no liability regardless of what the covenant says.
When did you buy the porperty?
The difference between repair and replace is that you only replace it if itis no longer in a fit state to repair. If the posts are OK and it can be repaied, there is no ned to replace.
Hi. I have 5 docs but they are simply the extracts, not the Land Reg deedswith the details I need on. There appear to be 5 different title numbers.
You can get Land Reg docs here for £3 each title number https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/www/wps/portal/!ut/p/b1/04_SjzS0tDQwMTIxMjLXj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMAfGjzOKNjSxMDA1NjDwsjM3MDTxN3dyNDUNMjQ1MjPWDU_P0c6McFQH3SLFU/
All I got was the one page summary for each title. I need the Official Copies of Title Register. They are £3 each and £3 each plan., £6 each title in total
Thanks. I have one set now. I will wait for the others.
I have them all now. It has taken a far disproportionate amount of time tostudy the documents than we would normally spend answering a question on herefor the fee. However, I took it on, so I will deal with it for you.
Normally, I would print all the documents off and go through them word byword so I cannot gurantee that I have missed a minor pount. It is a couple of hours job for which a solicitor would charge, probably£400 plus VAT. I have already spent over an hour on it.
I will just use the last three digits of the title numbers.
201 and 346 are owned byVerbeelen.
599, 693 and 659 are owned by Froud.
The only references I can find to fencing are at clause A3ii in 346 and inC1b of 599.
Refer to title 346 and read, if you will, clause B1. That is reallyimportant in this title.
Under normal circumstances, a positive freehold covenant is only andforcible against the original person who covenanted. Any subsequent buyers arenot bound unless each of the subsequent buyers has entered into a similar kindof covenant as in clause B1 of title 599. However, the covenant in clause B1 to perform the covenants refers to thecovenants in the Charges Register. There is no covenant with regard to thefence in the Charges Register, because it is actually in the Property Registerat clause 3ii.
However, the covenant in 346 appears to be to erect a fence between twopieces of land owned by Verbeelen. Although it is confusing because 3ii says toerect a fence with the boundary on the south and east, which would appear to bethe ones bordering the wood land , but then it goes on to say that they are thesouthern and eastern boundaries of the land known as Knowle Lodge , which is tothe north
Moving now to title 599. There is a covenant to a rector fence betweenpoints A and B, but there contained in the transfer deed and not shown on theland Registry title plan. Even so, there is no indemnity covenant as there isin title 346 clause B1, which means that it only applies if the current owneris the owner, who did the original covenant which it appears, was back in 1962.It appears that Froud only bought the property in 86.
If you let me know which border on which plan it will assist me to give youa specific answer. You appear to be Verbeelen and the neighbour Froud. Is thatcorrect?
I think the covenant that he is looking to enforce is that contained intitle 346.
In which case as Verbeelen bought the property in 1999, and there is onlyan indemnity at B2 to observe the covenants in the charges register (and thatin the property register is not mentioned). I don't think that Verbeelen has toput a fence up.
Assuming that it is not the southern and eastern boundary of Knowle Lodge butit is the southern and eastern boundary of 346 There is another issue and thatis that even if there is an enforceable covenant, once it has been breached for20 years or more (Hepworth v Pickles) , it is no longer enforceable.
Please bear with me today and over any weekends because I will be onlineand off-line.Please don't forget to positively rate my answer service (even if it was notwhat you wanted to hear) and I will follow up any further points you raise forfree.If you don't rate it positively, then the site keep your deposit and I get 0for my time. It is imperative that you give my answer a positive rating. Itdoesn't give me "a pat on the head", "good boy" (like ebay), it is mylivelihood!If in ratings you feel that you expected more or it only helped a little,please ask me for further info before rating me negatively otherwise I don'tget paid at all for my time and answer. The thread remains open for us to continue this exchange
The covenant to put a new fence up is contained in schedule attached to atransfer to a previous owner, dated 12 December 1984.
The property is freehold and freehold covenants are not enforceable againstsubsequent owners, only the original owner, unless there is an indemnity covenantwhich there is at clause B2.
However, clause B2 refers to you complying with the covenants in thecharges register, section C. None of those covenants concern putting a fence upand not of them refer to any rights granted or reserved in the 1999 transfer toyou.
I of the opinion therefore that if the neighbour wants a fence up, theneighbour is faced with paying it himself
You might want to print out this last post (although there is no reason whyyou cannot print any of the old thread out) and show it to your neighbour,along with the Official Copy 346.
PS there may be a covenant to put a fence up in the 1980transfer/conveyance or the 1985 transfer/conveyance, but without details ofthose, it is impossible to be. I think it doubtful or it won't not bespecifically mentioned in clause 3ii ofSection A because there would be no need.
You don't need any more docs although you might want to get the conveyances and transfers referred to in the Titles that you sent.
Yes the thread remains open.
No problem. I think they are unlikely to help but worth looking just to be sure
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).