Unadopted Roads

[xanthe]

Not sure if this is something that applies more often to Listed buildings or not, but hoping someone here might have some experience or advice...

The house we are buying has the front door facing onto an unadopted road which is basically the way from the main road into the church. The road used to be full of shops but is now just private houses (approx. 9 properties in total). Owners can park their cars in the road, but the church gates are at the end so no turning or way through. It's also used for a village fete type thing once a year. There is a flush brick pavement along the sides of the houses and it's tarmac in the centre.

The house has a second entrance and parking off the main road at the back which is where the bin collection is from. Post is delivered via the unadopted road.

The current owners have been there about 15 years and say they have no idea who maintains it (but they are not being overly helpful or forthcoming with anything apparently). The council say it's definitely not them and there is probably a residents association or maybe the church does. The church say that it's definitely not them and they've asked everyone they can think of and they all think the council does.

Our solicitor is hopping up and down about it all and wanting indemnity insurance from the current owners. As far as I can see, the biggest issue is if some old dear slips on her way to church and breaks a leg and sues us all. But I have been told that this is only possible if we have been advised of a hazard and failed to correct it. Husband wants to tell solicitor to forget about it and just get a move on. I want to be sure what we are doing.

Anyone have any experience?

 

[TheRoost]

Not sure if this is something that applies more often to Listed buildings or not, but hoping someone here might have some experience or advice...

The house we are buying has the front door facing onto an unadopted road which is basically the way from the main road into the church. The road used to be full of shops but is now just private houses (approx. 9 properties in total). Owners can park their cars in the road, but the church gates are at the end so no turning or way through. It's also used for a village fete type thing once a year. There is a flush brick pavement along the sides of the houses and it's tarmac in the centre.

The house has a second entrance and parking off the main road at the back which is where the bin collection is from. Post is delivered via the unadopted road.

The current owners have been there about 15 years and say they have no idea who maintains it (but they are not being overly helpful or forthcoming with anything apparently). The council say it's definitely not them and there is probably a residents association or maybe the church does. The church say that it's definitely not them and they've asked everyone they can think of and they all think the council does.

Our solicitor is hopping up and down about it all and wanting indemnity insurance from the current owners. As far as I can see, the biggest issue is if some old dear slips on her way to church and breaks a leg and sues us all. But I have been told that this is only possible if we have been advised of a hazard and failed to correct it. Husband wants to tell solicitor to forget about it and just get a move on. I want to be sure what we are doing.

Anyone have any experience?

No experience of unadopted roads, but indemnity insurance seems to be very popular with solicitors for solving all sorts of issues (I'm sure they are getting a cut) it might be worth getting them to find out the price for such a policy - For example we are insured against the possibility of contaminated land and the associated exploration/remedial works - it only cost £50 for a 15year policy (happily paid for by the seller)

 

[xanthe]

Mine certainly seems very keen on them! Sellers do not seem keen in the slightest.

Just had a 28 page thing on contamination land in the in-box...

 

[skier-hughes]

I would think it would be your responsibility to regularly check for hazards and so long as you could prove that this was done and no hazard was present at that time you could fight it, but I doubt you could just say we didn't know there was a hazard. Same would go for after inclement weather, you'd need to check for damaged property, trees etc.

 

[Flyfisher]

I'm assuming there is nothing in the deeds to the property being purchased, otherwise the solicitor should have found it.

First of all, I'd want to know who owns the road/land in question and to be sure that the property has a right of access over it. Secondly, I'd want to know what maintenance commitments, if any, apply to the property.

For a few pounds (£4 the last time I did it) you can get copies of any registered titles from Land Registry, so you could check what, if any, covenants apply to the road by the neighbouring properties. If any exist, they may not all be equitable as these things change over time.

As an example, we own the lane that originally only served our house. Over the years (before our time) parcels of land adjacent to the lane have been sold off for houses and it now serves other properties. When the land was conveyed, rights were established for access, services and maintenance and these are clearly documented in the property titles. As owners of the land, we are responsible for doing the maintenance and the various properties are responsible for contributing towards the cost. The first property to be sold has to pay £5 per year ( :roll: ). The second two properties have to pay 25% each and the last 4 properties have to pay 12.5% each. So, on paper, it looks like we should be making £5 from all these covenants! :lol:

Soon after we moved in, we were asked about our intentions for resurfacing the lane, which is tarmac but was in a very poor, badly potholed condition. After investigating the liabilities we were relieved we would not have to bear all the cost but also somewhat nervous about facing angry neighbours arguing over the unfairness of the arrangements that had arisen over time - even though they all knew their own liabilities, or should have done since they were clearly stated in their deeds.

Fortunately, there was an outbreak of good sense and everyone agreed to contribute equally and all paid £500 towards the necessary work (including ourselves, though we strictly have no liability). If we had less friendly and more argumentative neighbours then I can imagine all sorts of fall out from such a situation, but that's so often how these historical arrangements evolve over the years and what seems eminently sensible (and agreed to) at the time may not remain so after many decades - at which point much depends on the people involved.

I can also relate similar story but on a larger-scale. Our previous house was in a small wooded estate served by private roads and a management limited company had been established to maintain them. it was run by the residents and all owners could become a shareholder for £1. The annual levy was around £80 but varied a little depending on works done and reserves depleted. I don't recall ever paying more than £100 per year in the 21 years we lived there and the roads were maintained to a far higher quality than the surrounding country lanes!

On a more cautionary note, someone on the other side of our village fell prey to someone registering all the unregistered pieces of land in the area, one piece of which was a strip between their property and the public road, leaving them with no formal access to the road - a situation that had existed for as long as they had lived there (40-ish years) and could have undoubtedly been fought but they didn't want the worry and stress so bought the strip of land for (I've heard) nearly £10k :shock: I assume this is the sort of thing that conveyancing solicitors should be on the look-out for in order to protect their clients. Clients don't have to take any notice, of course, but they should certainly be informed.

 

[xanthe]

According to the Land Registry the road is definitely unadopted and doesn't belong to anyone and no funny bits of road that could belong to someone, so that at least cuts out the chance of suddenly being charged to enter our front-door.

Solicitor has managed to get a Statutory Declaration from the vendors to say that they have enjoyed unimpeded access for x number of years etc etc.

I think what we will need to do is find out from other residents what the situation is with regard to repairs - looking on zoopla/rightmove etc, it seems like all but one house has been sold in the last 7 years or so, so at least there aren't going to be a load of people who have lived there forever and unwilling to modify the status quo.

The council did say that if it's in good repair - which it is - then they would consider adopting it, which could be the best solution - especially as the main sewer runs the length of it. From what I can work out, we will all be jointly liable for any problems with said sewer. Fortunately water pipes are elsewhere so that's one less thing to worry about.

I'd be less worried if it wasn't the main entrance to the church, but rather a lot of potential hip-fracturing old biddies traipse along it, which raise the risk of being liable for injuries.

 

[Flyfisher]

According to the Land Registry the road is definitely unadopted and doesn't belong to anyone . . . .

Don't forget that Land Registry can only comment on land that is registered with them and cannot know anything about unregistered land. Being unregistered does not prove the land does not belong to anyone and it has only been fairly recently that property has to be registered at Land Registry when ownership changes. Of course, it's quite possible that the real owner doesn't want the road/land or that they don't even realise they own it - especially if it was once part of a large estate with bits sold off over the years with inaccurate or inadequate conveyances.

Believe me, our deeds are full of such things and it's astonishing how easy it is for things to become confused when mistakes are not noticed and lines are so badly drawn on maps that there is plenty of scope for confusion! The lane I mentioned above was not registered before us and any search of Land Registry would have shown this. However, we were able to register it because our deeds clearly proved our ownership. LR is pretty strict when it comes to first registrations, and rightly so otherwise anyone could register any bits of unregistered land.

I would say that the main thing is to ensure you have a legal right of access over the land and would ask your solicitor what the vendor's previous unimpeded access actually means in practice. I would be asking if access could be endangered by someone popping up with a valid claim of ownership. If not, then there can be no real problems if the land is owned or not.

As for liabilities and your scenario of someone tripping over and breaking a hip, I would guess it's unlikely that you could be liable for anything that happens on a piece of land that you don't own, especially if you have no legal duty to maintain the pathway on that land. However, if you do 'maintain' the land by resurfacing the path then that may change the situation. I don't really know the legal implications and again this is what I would be asking the solicitor.

As for the sewer pipes, you may not be liable for these following recent changes in the legislation that required the water companies to adopt private sewers in certain circumstances. Details here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69356/private-sewers-transfer-guidance110928.pdf The water company serving your area would probably have more information about your specific case.

 

[worms]

The council say it's definitely not them and there is probably a residents association or maybe the church does. The church say that it's definitely not them and they've asked everyone they can think of and they all think the council does.

I've come across a number of situations where, despite having no ownership or liability, the council has in the distant past, surfaced a side road when doing the main road adjacent. This causes problems down the years when it raises the presumption that the road must belong to the council and be already adopted. Of course, nowadays such repairs are so much more expensive and money that much tighter, so councils are bound to take a stricter view of what roads will be repaired. However, this could explain why everyone assumes that the road belongs to the council, while the council claims otherwise.

 

[MatthewC]

Without having seen the road, it does sound fairly well prepared with tarmac, and pavement on the side. That makes it sound as though it was done by the council at some time - in my experience old private roads tend to be more of a narrow lane of gravel or tarmac, basically a path without any kerb or pavement.

I guess the church has been there for ages; if it's not part of the churchyard then it is most unlikely that the church would own it. However, how old are the other houses? Have you asked any of the potential neighbours? If any of the other houses has changed hands recently (which you can find out) then they might have researched the same question; it's possible that it could be owned with one of those houses.

 

[xanthe]

All the houses are old - oldest is C15th and everything else is either C16th or C17th. Church is C14th with later additions. Everything is either Grade I or II* except us (Grade II). Four properties one side of the lane and 5 properties on the other.

The lane goes from the main road to the gate of the churchyard.

We currently live in London so is a bit tricky to ask the neighbours. Solicitor asked the vendors to go and ask the neighbours since they said they didn't know and they wouldn't. The biggest property on the street is in the same situation as us... heading for exchange, completing in January, but I don't know the buyers and unfortunately the Estate Agent is the same one.

Actually, would it be an idea to ring the Estate Agent for that property and see if they know/can find out?

The other properties all seem to have been sold over the last 10 years or so.

The edge by the houses and the church gate is all old bricks set in earth and I doubt the council has touched those, but the central part is tarmac. The surface is in very good condition - which is why I'm very surprised that the current owners are pleading complete ignorance. They've been there since the early noughties and the road surface looks younger than that. It's a very short road and other than owners parking their cars and people walking to the church, there is no other traffic, so the surface isn't subjected to a lot of wear and tear.

Annoyingly the original deeds to the house are missing. I imagine the land must have belonged to someone originally. There was a fairly important series of Lords of the Manor (and rather a lot of other bits of England) who were responsible for building the church (and knocking bits down and rebuilding them on a fairly regular basis) and I imagine they owned it at that point, but I don't think they have any direct-line descendants in the area. All the properties on our side of the road have access from the back and would be perfectly possible not to use the front entrance, but those on the other side have to use the lane.

Our solicitor is almost worse than useless. I need to talk to the Chancel Repair insurance people next week so I might see if they have any idea.

 

[Zebra]

Sympathies. Nothing worse than a useless solicitor when buying a house.
Well, actually, being eaten by a lion is probably worse than having a useless solicitor, but apart from that......

 

[worms]

Sympathies. Nothing worse than a useless solicitor when buying a house.
Well, actually, being eaten by a lion is probably worse than having a useless solicitor, but apart from that......

At least lions are quick!

 

[Feltwell]

Sympathies. Nothing worse than a useless solicitor when buying a house.
Well, actually, being eaten by a lion is probably worse than having a useless solicitor, but apart from that......

At least lions are quick!

They both have nasty charges though. :wink:

 

[Keithj]

Agree with the above. If the road itself has not been sold in the recent past, the Land Registry will know nothing about it. It's a pity your solicitor isn't more "on the ball".

We were trying to find out who owned the land between the bottom of our churchyard and the stream - it's derelict/abandoned woodland. Land Registry had nothing. Through a friend, we managed to get someone in London to look in the Church of England records, and he found evidence that it was part of the Church grounds, not consecrated because not needed. There's a fence round it, but it's the "other side's'" fence all the way. We've left it as it is, as an excellent wildlife refuge, apart from clearing a small area of nettles to make a new more discreet location for a shed to replace the concrete monstrosity leaning against the church.

It might be worth contacting the churchwardens and/or the diocesan registry to see if they know who owns the road. The church usually has documents going back centuries, if you can but find where they've been filed. If it's in London, I'd be surprised if they don't know or have the means to find out. The PCC records may note when the road was being resurfaced - it's likely that they would have been told and would have discussed it. That would tell you who resurfaced it and when, and they may tell you who paid for it.

We found from the deeds of our place in Norfolk that we owned the (unadopted) lane outside the cottage, the length of the property and to the middle of the road. This neatly solved the problem of the wacky academic down the lane who kept putting a skip or a pile of sand etc right outside our window blocking our view out. "You think you own the road, do you?" "Yes, we do own it, and we have our deeds to prove it. Now move your skip - it's £100 a day from tomorrow to use our land for your stuff".

This (Suffolk) house came with a 3 foot wide strip by the entrance that wasn't marked as "ours" on the Land Registry document, and which the Council assured us wasn't theirs. The seller paid for an insurance to cover any claim to ownership by a third party.

 

[xanthe]

Tried the church and they asked around and came back to say that no-one had a clue, but definitely wasn't theirs and they thought the council last paid for it to be resurfaced. It's in Surrey rather than London so less of an obsession about who owns every mm of land.

Nice one on the boffin with his sand. Was his face a picture?

 

[Flyfisher]

We found from the deeds of our place in Norfolk that we owned the (unadopted) lane outside the cottage, the length of the property and to the middle of the road. This neatly solved the problem of the wacky academic down the lane who kept putting a skip or a pile of sand etc right outside our window blocking our view out. "You think you own the road, do you?" "Yes, we do own it, and we have our deeds to prove it. Now move your skip - it's £100 a day from tomorrow to use our land for your stuff".

This (Suffolk) house came with a 3 foot wide strip by the entrance that wasn't marked as "ours" on the Land Registry document, and which the Council assured us wasn't theirs. The seller paid for an insurance to cover any claim to ownership by a third party.

That describes some very familiar things that we've had to deal with at our house. Fortunately, we had all the deeds and other documents to prove our ownership of unregistered bits of land, but even so there were still a few anomalies that had arisen due to poorly documented conveyances over the years since the original house in 250 acres had been split up into smaller titles. One oddity was that our title to our lane is separate to the title to the house - not a problem in principle, except for the fact that the two titles were not adjacent due to poorly drawn maps, leaving a gap of unregistered land. We were not particularly bothered since the house deeds clearly showed our right of way along the entire lane and we knew from underlying the historical deeds that the land had not been otherwise conveyed away.

Anyway, a couple of years ago, we decided to contact Land registry to see if this issue could be cleared up without involving lawyers and cost that would exceed the value of the land and they were most helpful. After reviewing our documents, they sent out a surveyor to accurately measure things (with a fancy GPS widget accurate to a few centimetres!) and subsequently amended our titles so that they were properly adjacent and with no unregistered gaps. Total cost to us was about £40.

Keith - your "3 foot wide strip" could be a similar situation and it may be possible to have your title amended as ours was. My understanding is that LR is very keen to get all land registered so are very willing to listen to anyone with a good case and update their titles accordingly.

 

[Keithj]

That's a good thought, Flyfisher. I've had a few dealings with them regarding the churchyard, and they couldn't have been more helpful (other than that the land wasn't registered with them - but then, I doubt many churches are).

xanthe - I assume that was the local church/vicar/PCC who will only know what they've dealt with. I've spent happy days at the Record Office wading through ancient diocesan records looking for stuff. Suffolk/Norfolk ones go back to around 1500, so there's plenty to satisfy the appetite. The chief records chap at Church House in London has more information in his basement than we could dream of. The problem is finding the right bit, but given the church name and location you may be surprised.

 

[steveb]

what is the age of the church and road?

we have a similar situation, the road is apparently not adopted - but some research implies that apparently any roads in existence in 1835 should be adopted by default, because of the 1835 highways act.

however how you get the council to act on this (and whether this information is correct...) is another matter

-Steve

 

[CliffordPope]

I have read warnings that indemnity insurance only covers the legal costs of dealing with the unlikely claim arising, and is unlikely to pay for the actual cost of meeting the liability - eg resurfacing the road, or paying the church tithes.
That's why they are so cheap I presume - they are useless.

 

[drpepe]

I have read warnings that indemnity insurance only covers the legal costs of dealing with the unlikely claim arising, and is unlikely to pay for the actual cost of meeting the liability - eg resurfacing the road, or paying the church tithes.
That's why they are so cheap I presume - they are useless.

This is exactly the understanding I have. They are a great money-spinner for someone though!

I thought I'd make a comment on the OP's vendors - they seem to be being remarkably unhelpful, considering you are going to hand them hundreds of thousands of pounds. The cynic in me wonders whether they have something to hide!