Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:56 pm

mr sheen wrote:Presumably before bidding at auction, you read the terms and conditions of the auctioneer since they usually include clauses that presume that you have made all enquiries and investigations in relation to all legal issues eg rights, easements, drains, services etc etc and that by bidding you are happy that the property meets your needs ie that you are happy with everything to do with the property 'as is'.

So when you suggest that you will win at court, you are actually taking a big risk because these matters have not just occurred they existed before you bid on the property that you confirmed fully met your needs by bidding for it at auction. If you didn't like the drains, you shouldn't have bought it...I actually think the neighbours are deliberately dragging their feet and would be happy to 'see you in court' and let you seek to prove that having accepted that you were happy with everything to do with the property by bidding at auction, you are now entitled to changes to be made to the property at someone else's expense.....good luck with that!


I get your logic, however forget it was bought at auction. if what you are saying is correct ANY PROPERTY bought with a pre-existing boundary dispute would not be challengeable.

in law When I purchased from vendor I inherited there rites and privalages to the land(and burdens). eg if the vendor had the rite to dispute the enchroachment before I bought it, then that rite passes on to me.
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Ads are not endorsed by www.gardenlaw.co.uk or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.
 

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby mr sheen » Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:51 pm

You cannot forget it was bought at auction subject to the T&C's that you agreed to....this will probably be one of the first things their solicitors bring up. They will probably claim there was no dispute, the vendors had acquiesced to the situation as it was and you bought it 'as is'.

If you were unhappy with the situation and the results of all the investigations and enquiries, you should not have bid...or if you felt more investigations were required, you should not have agreed to the T&Cs and should not have bid.

If you take this to court, are you going to try to convince the Judge that s/he should ignore the fact that it was bought at auction subject to the T&Cs?....how can that be ignored? The vendor sold on the property 'warts n all' at auction in a buyer beware situation and you chose to take it on. This is not a normal property sale situation where a dispute was undeclared/ falsely represented.
mr sheen
 
Posts: 2093
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 5:00 pm

auction terms are irrelevant. Because LR title is clean and is exactly what I bought. the title gives property rites that cannot be taken away. You do not loose property title rites buying from auction. That is mainly what you are purchasing at auction.
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby Collaborate » Thu Oct 15, 2015 5:04 pm

mr sheen wrote:You cannot forget it was bought at auction subject to the T&C's that you agreed to....this will probably be one of the first things their solicitors bring up. They will probably claim there was no dispute, the vendors had acquiesced to the situation as it was and you bought it 'as is'.



Unless Scots law is different to that in E&W justjohn is correct. A trespasser doesn't get away with it simply because the land is sold. All right held by the original owner pass to the new owner, together with all responsibilities (including responsibility for trespass). This seems to be an ever accepted principle on this board until now.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 5:30 pm

Collaborate wrote:
mr sheen wrote:You cannot forget it was bought at auction subject to the T&C's that you agreed to....this will probably be one of the first things their solicitors bring up. They will probably claim there was no dispute, the vendors had acquiesced to the situation as it was and you bought it 'as is'.



Unless Scots law is different to that in E&W justjohn is correct. A trespasser doesn't get away with it simply because the land is sold. All right held by the original owner pass to the new owner, together with all responsibilities (including responsibility for trespass). This seems to be an ever accepted principle on this board until now.


its the same


yes because if it was not, you could steal land or sell dodgy properties at auction you don't own with seemingly legit title.

Auction terms only protect vendors and estate agents etc. they do not take away legal rights from LR titles. LR title is transferable including all rights. Basic property law and rights.

When you buy at auction you get a legal pack what is in it is more or less what a solicitor needs too complete the sale. There will be a title in the pack, that title should be checked with LR. if its good and clean that's what you are buying with all legal rights.
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby mr sheen » Thu Oct 15, 2015 5:35 pm

Yes the right to dispute the trespass does pass on collaborate...but it often continues and unless you take it all the way to court or equivalent, the trespasser often does get away with it.
The difference is that with a traditional sale, you get the title and check that it matches what you see on the ground and if it doesn't you can back out or insist the vendor sorts it out. Also the vendor retains some degree of responsibility and would support you if a court case did result. Whereas in this case, the vendor is unlikely to get involved at all so the only non-hearsay evidence comes from the neighbours, creating risks with court. This is why it is more difficult to successfully rectify issues after sale especially after auction sale and why people should be more cautious with an auction. Unless you accept it 'as is' you have a massive uphill battle that will be fraught with risks.

Before taking this to court the OP needs to be fully aware of all possible arguments he will be up against and then assess the risk with court and costs.
Last edited by mr sheen on Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
mr sheen
 
Posts: 2093
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby Collaborate » Thu Oct 15, 2015 5:58 pm

mr sheen wrote:The difference is that with a traditional sale, you get the title and check that it matches what you see on the ground and if it doesn't you can back out or insist the vendor sorts it out.


I'm afraid that's not correct. Buyers have every opportunity to inspect the title before placing a bid at auction. If there are apparent issues and you still bid, tough.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:03 pm

mr sheen wrote:Yes the right to dispute the trespass does pass on collaborate...but it often continues and unless you take it all the way to court or equivalent, the trespasser often does get away with it.
The difference is that with a traditional sale, you get the title and check that it matches what you see on the ground and if it doesn't you can back out or insist the vendor sorts it out. Also the vendor retains some degree of responsibility and would support you if a court case did result. Whereas in this case, the vendor is unlikely to get involved at all so the only non-hearsay evidence comes from the neighbours creating risks with court.


But its a clean title. just like any other sale. Auction terms do not interfere with LR titles/rights that is what is bought at auction its about the only thing you are guaranteed in getting.

Furthermore you can purchase a residential/commercial property with an active dispute, much easier to do with cash. you do not have to back out or get the vendor to sort it.(in Scotland some properties with bad boundary titles are bought and sold all the time with indemnity policies)

You have said I loose rights because of auction t&c's that's not the case.

As for your statement above, this is a commercial property I already have a statement from the vendor and the legal pack stating what is on the deeds that were in the legal pack are what I should get. On another note the vendor is not a cowboy builder. They are a company that is on the stock exchange. (I will not say who it is, but every person on here, would know there name).

there is no dispute or defence from neighbour the issue is they are not doing anything. They have fully admitted the situation they have built on land they do not own and run pipes across it.(via solicitor)
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby mr sheen » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:06 pm

Collaborate wrote:
mr sheen wrote:The difference is that with a traditional sale, you get the title and check that it matches what you see on the ground and if it doesn't you can back out or insist the vendor sorts it out.


I'm afraid that's not correct. Buyers have every opportunity to inspect the title before placing a bid at auction. If there are apparent issues and you still bid, tough.


Absolutely! That's what I said! He accepted the property as he saw it. What is incorrect about my comment? He had every opportunity to check absolutely everything and choose not to bid, but by bidding he agreed to all T&Cs and can no longer insist vendor sorts it out like you can during normal sale.
With traditional sale you can back out but not once you've bid, you accept it as is.
mr sheen
 
Posts: 2093
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:08 pm

Collaborate wrote:
mr sheen wrote:The difference is that with a traditional sale, you get the title and check that it matches what you see on the ground and if it doesn't you can back out or insist the vendor sorts it out.


I'm afraid that's not correct. Buyers have every opportunity to inspect the title before placing a bid at auction. If there are apparent issues and you still bid, tough.


yes and no ... E&W should be the same if there are certain issues with title and it is brought too the attention of the auction house or the vender they must let the other bidders know, before the auction if possible.(in Scotland)

If a property in Scotland marketed by an EA has a bad title or dispute and the EA/vendor is made aware they must divulge it.
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby mr sheen » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:26 pm

justjohn wrote:
mr sheen wrote:Yes the right to dispute the trespass does pass on collaborate...but it often continues and unless you take it all the way to court or equivalent, the trespasser often does get away with it.
The difference is that with a traditional sale, you get the title and check that it matches what you see on the ground and if it doesn't you can back out or insist the vendor sorts it out. Also the vendor retains some degree of responsibility and would support you if a court case did result. Whereas in this case, the vendor is unlikely to get involved at all so the only non-hearsay evidence comes from the neighbours creating risks with court.


But its a clean title. just like any other sale. Auction terms do not interfere with LR titles/rights that is what is bought at auction its about the only thing you are guaranteed in getting.

Furthermore you can purchase a residential/commercial property with an active dispute, much easier to do with cash. you do not have to back out or get the vendor to sort it.(in Scotland some properties with bad boundary titles are bought and sold all the time with indemnity policies)

You have said I loose rights because of auction t&c's that's not the case.

As for your statement above, this is a commercial property I already have a statement from the vendor and the legal pack stating what is on the deeds that were in the legal pack are what I should get. On another note the vendor is not a cowboy builder. They are a company that is on the stock exchange. (I will not say who it is, but every person on here, would know there name).

there is no dispute or defence from neighbour the issue is they are not doing anything. They have fully admitted the situation they have built on land they do not own and run pipes across it.(via solicitor)



So what do you want from us?
No you haven't lost rights, you have reduced your chances of proving your case convincingly and winning in court and recovering costs.
mr sheen
 
Posts: 2093
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:36 pm

mr sheen wrote:

So what do you want from us?
No you haven't lost rights, you have reduced your chances of proving your case convincingly and winning in court and recovering costs.


Why? its open and shut regarding a case.

Vendor says the lands mine, LR say lands mine. Neighbour say lands mine. Solicitor says they have no defence.

I don't have to prove anything no one is arguing the land is not mine, no one is saying the extension or the pipework is lawfully on the land.

Why would any case not be convincingly proven and won. Why would any judge say it was not mine?

As I have said Title rights are transferable I have the exact same rights as the original vendor.

Because someone buys at auction does not mean they are accepting off boundary disputes/movement. Place/method of purchase is irrelevant.

I was wanting a way to move things forward without crucifying my neighbour and costing me serious money. I was looking too see if anyone could help thinking out the box.(you seem to have rewritten basic property laws and title rights, bit too out of the box for me or any judge in my opinion)
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby MacadamB53 » Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:29 pm

Hi justjohn,

did the extension or drainage works require planning approval?

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6033
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby justjohn » Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:41 pm

MacadamB53 wrote:Hi justjohn,

did the extension or drainage works require planning approval?

Kind regards, Mac


For the extension yes. on the planning application there is a box you tick to say you own the land. in Scotland you do not have to own the land to apply or get planning permission or prove you own the land. No checks are ever done.

extension was built 2012 ish

its the drainage that's the issue for me. I can only see rain water drainage I am legally entitled to remove someone else's property from my land as long as I do not cause any damage and hold the item for the owner. I could remove the downpipe. However its the pipes in the ground that are my main issue.(I need to dig the area up. for a gate post). the neighbours have said i can affix the post to there wall, but that will create other issues.

I am trying to be nice and I think that is my downfall lol
justjohn
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: Scotland - Boundary dispute - with a Difference

Postby MacadamB53 » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:28 pm

Hi justjohn,

For the extension yes. on the planning application there is a box you tick to say you own the land. in Scotland you do not have to own the land to apply or get planning permission or prove you own the land. No checks are ever done.

if the plan showed the encroachment that would be the ideal time for your predecessor to exercise the right to dispute the encroachment which you think passed to you.

and because that right was not exercised when the predecessor was given such evidence, under English Law your neighbour may have been able to successfully argue 'estoppel by acquiescence' as a defence.

Kind regards, Mac
edit: surely the downpipe can be modified so it terminates on their land into a water butt as a temporary measure? then you can dig up the pipes at your leisure
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6033
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Ads are not endorsed by www.gardenlaw.co.uk or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.
 
PreviousNext

Return to Boundaries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests