another boundary question, physical feature evidence

another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby leemason » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:32 pm

Hello all,

Im in the proccess of purchasing a new house and there is a possible boundary issue ive raised. im awaiting the solicitors advice on how to procceed given its a small issue.

the current owner doesnt know why its like it is, and i havent yet spoken to the next door (awaiting solicitors advice before contacting either before or after purchase).

these houses were built in 2015 so relativley new and the title plans are pretty clear. im aware of the usual "physical boundarys are different to legal etc" stuff as ive been reading a little on here.

I have the title plan for both properties and an arial screenshot. the land in question is to the front of the property. when viewed from the ground the next doors grass cuts into "our" land from nothing to around 2.5 ft at the road. this space does contain a manhole cover so its possible it was just set like this for visual appeal when being built. its a small but significant enough size and actually is more pronounced from the ground than the arial shots.

Im not overly obsessed with the land but of course want to get it settled before we complete on the property (as i have plans to eventually pave under front window making window cleaning easier) which would include this peice of land, and dont want to move in shouting the odds about whats mine and whats next doors. not a recipe for great relations.

So here is the title plan for both houses (merged in photoshop to get them on same image, next door at top, "my" house bottom)

plans.jpg
title plan
plans.jpg (237.01 KiB) Viewed 559 times


and here is the arial view

physical.jpg
arial view
physical.jpg (165.43 KiB) Viewed 559 times


As you can see from the title plans the "boundary" as described on both house titles is actually the outside wall of the top house and this extends to the road.

however from the arial view you can see from the corner of next doors house their grass extends into ours and around the manhole cover (which if you lay a strait line parallel to their external wall you can see the manhole cover is wholly in our land).

i know their wall is the "physical" boundary. but based on this and the title is it safe to say its actually a very good representation of the "legal" boundary too?

its not hard to work out as seen in this overlay that the grass extends into ours and really the "boundary" is a parallel line from their wall.

overlay.jpg
overlay
overlay.jpg (178.31 KiB) Viewed 559 times


im going to hear from the solicitor soon, but wanted some other opinions not so much on how to deal with it "legally" but more so from a neigbourly point of view.

Im almost 100% sure this was probably just laid like this by the builders and has then just been overlooked by all involved since then.

The house is local so ive been tempted to just go and ask the next door about it. but dont want to start our relationship with any bad feelings.

I also dont want to get into conversations about it with the wrong information.

because this is how it is does that make it change the boundary now? and also how does the fact its only been here 2 years effect that?

Would you approach the next door? how would you enter the conversation?


PS. i know overlaying plans onto arial shots isnt "proof" as such im mearly demonstrating the difference between the plan and the physical situation. the plan is clearly a strait line, whereas the physical has a kink in it
leemason
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:31 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: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby leemason » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:33 pm

As i couldnt upload more than 3 images here is a close up of the plans overlaied onto the arial shot to indicate the issue im raising.

Screenshot 2017-07-14 22.02.01.png
close up
Screenshot 2017-07-14 22.02.01.png (215.46 KiB) Viewed 558 times
leemason
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:31 pm

Re: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby MacadamB53 » Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:26 pm

Hi leemason,

the plan isn't a plan - it's an OS map and OS maps have an inherent but accepted level of inaccuracy.

the difference between the OS map and the aerial shot is within this "margin of error".

in other words, there's nothing to discuss - happy days!

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6032
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby leemason » Sun Jul 16, 2017 7:24 pm

i understand a maps a map and a plans a plan.

but surley the title clearly shows the boundary runs as a strait line?
leemason
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:31 pm

Re: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby MacadamB53 » Sun Jul 16, 2017 7:38 pm

leemason wrote:i understand a maps a map and a plans a plan.

but surley the title clearly shows the boundary runs as a strait line?
the title plan shows that the edge of the land in question runs along a boundary feature plotted by OS on a map of the locale, accepting that the map does not 100% tally with what was observed by the OS surveyor.

does that help?

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6032
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby leemason » Sun Jul 16, 2017 8:39 pm

hi mac,

im glad im getting replies but i still dont really understand what your saying.

are you saying a title plan having a strait line for both properties would intentionally be drawn that way just because its "within acceptable margins" knowing thats not the case on the ground. i cant belive that would be true.

if it was meant to be at an angle wouldnt it be drawn like that (considering the very accurate none straight lines used on other sides of the boundaries.

Are you saying it is/isnt meant to be for our property?

and if it is are you saying is stupid to try and address it?

why would an os surveyor get every other boundary line (for both properties) so accurate (and considering the complexity of the top boundary) that it could actually be overlaid directly onto a satelite image and matchup except this small part of the land?
leemason
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:31 pm

Re: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby MacadamB53 » Sun Jul 16, 2017 10:36 pm

Hi leemason,

you said you know the difference between a map and a plan.

are you saying a title plan having a strait line for both properties would intentionally be drawn that way just because its "within acceptable margins" knowing thats not the case on the ground

mmm... ...I'll persevere.

the title plan shows that HMLR took an OS map of the area and added a red line to highlight whereabouts in the world the property in question can be found - no more, no less.

the intention of the cartographer who produced the map was to accurately depict - give or take an acceptable margin of error - what on the list of items of interest had been surveyed: buildings, walls, fences, roads, pavements, etc.

the surveyor did not go door-to-door asking who owned what.

and HMLR did not visit your property to check if the OS map they were going to use for the title plan was 100% accurate in this instance.

does that help?

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6032
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: another boundary question, physical feature evidence

Postby SarahSue » Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:11 pm

I had a not dissimilar issue. It appeared that the OS map showed one boundary but an entirely different one on the ground i.e. part of our garden, if strictly split in line with the boundary between two properties i.e. between both windows say, would belong to our neighbour. But I did seek advice and was told that in the event of a dispute what would count is how the properties are laid out on the ground i.e. it looks like the boundary has become the edge of our garden. Since all the other houses in the street are set out this way, there would be no dispute. It is simply the way the gardens and driveways were laid out.
But I do not blame anyone for questioning this, especially if just buying a property in order to head off any potential issues.
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 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.
 

Return to Boundaries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dogfish55, louise12 and 8 guests