Any property lawyer/conveyancers on here?



Hawkings Boots said:
Whack it up or send a PM
Click to expand...
Here you go...
The land tinted yellow on the filed plan has the benefit of the
following rights granted by but is subject to the following rights
reserved by a Conveyance thereof dated 22 November 1930 made between
(1) Alfred Laurence Dixon (Vendor) and (2) Gordon Hallett:-
"TOGETHER with the right of user for all purposes as heretofore enjoyed
in common with the Vendor or the owner or occupiers for the time being
of Numbers 25 and 27 High Street Iron Bridge aforesaid of the passage
or entry between the hereditaments hereby conveyed and Number 27 High
Street Ironbridge aforesaid ...... AND TOGETHER ALSO with the benefit
of and subject to all party walls and fences support of walls sewers
drains spoutings water pipes rights of drainage and any other
privileges or advantages in the nature of easements as are now enjoyed
or suffered (or which but for the fact that the said hereditaments and
premises hereby conveyed and the adjoining hereditaments have belonged
to the same owner would be enjoyed or suffered) by the owner or
occupier of the said hereditaments hereby conveyed in common with the
owner and occupier for the time being of the said adjoining
hereditaments ...... AND ALSO EXCEPTING AND RESERVING to the owners and
occupiers for the time being of Number 27 High Street Iron Bridge
aforesaid the user of the soft water supply from a tank or cistern
situate on the premises hereby conveyed subject to the said owners and
occupiers paying a fair proportion of the expense of keeping the said
tank or cistern in a reasonable and proper state of repair."
Click to expand...
Probably best that I explain the situation...we have a pub at number 27 and need to use the access which belongs to number 26 (the text above is from the deeds of 26) to get customers from the pub to our terrace at the rear of the property but the owner is refusing us access. We need to know if she's actually entitled to refuse access but, honestly, I can't fathom the text from the deeds!
safc9450 said:
If it's in English just ask the person who wrote it to explain in plain English.
Click to expand...
It was written in 1930, not entirely sure that person will be around to explain. :lol:
 
DoctorMick said:
Here you go...

Probably best that I explain the situation...we have a pub at number 27 and need to use the access which belongs to number 26 (the text above is from the deeds of 26) to get customers from the pub to our terrace at the rear of the property but the owner is refusing us access. We need to know if she's actually entitled to refuse access but, honestly, I can't fathom the text from the deeds!

It was written in 1930, not entirely sure that person will be around to explain. :lol:
Click to expand...
This seems a RESTRICTIVE COVENANT put in place to protect property 26. Covenants are designed to protect both parties (in my opinion) One can't damage the other. Was the pub built after covenant was put in place etc. Law of Property act 1925 s84. Property lawyer is your best bet. Has the covenant actually been registered with Land Registry etc ?May also had a time scale imposed on it .Sorry cannot help any further. Hope you get sorted .
 
Assuming the "land tinted yellow on the filed plan" is the passage, I would read that as the right for the owners / occupiers of 25 and 27 to use the passage. But worth checking with a specialist before you try to enforce it.

I have used people per hour in the past to find cheap qualified conveyancers for one off stuff without going to the cost and effort of appointing a proper law firm.
 
DoctorMick said:
Here you go...

Probably best that I explain the situation...we have a pub at number 27 and need to use the access which belongs to number 26 (the text above is from the deeds of 26) to get customers from the pub to our terrace at the rear of the property but the owner is refusing us access. We need to know if she's actually entitled to refuse access but, honestly, I can't fathom the text from the deeds!

It was written in 1930, not entirely sure that person will be around to explain. :lol:
Click to expand...

Its difficult to give an exact answer from just the title for 26 but from what you have quoted that doesn't give you a right to use the passage. It just (a) confirms the right for 26 and (b) lets 26 know that other people can use it (this doesn't mean others have an automatic right to use it)

Without all of the information I suspect that 25, 26 and 27 were all held under one title previously and the 1930 Conveyance was when 26 was split off

I would hope the answer will be in the title for 27...

Quick edit as reading again are you sure that 27 doesn't own the passage anyway as it would be strange for 26 to be granted a right of way over something it owns?
 
Last edited:
Hawkings Boots said:
Its difficult to give an exact answer from just the title for 26 but from what you have quoted that doesn't give you a right to use the passage. It just (a) confirms the right for 26 and (b) lets 26 know that other people can use it (this doesn't mean others have an automatic right to use it)

Without all of the information I suspect that 25, 26 and 27 were all held under one title previously and the 1930 Conveyance was when 26 was split off

I would hope the answer will be in the title for 27...

Quick edit as reading again are you sure that 27 doesn't own the passage anyway as it would be strange for 26 to be granted a right of way over something it owns?
Click to expand...
There is nothing about the passage in the title deeds for 27. There isn't a digital copy of the plan for 27 available for some reason so I'm waiting for that to come through the post. Our landlord, who owns 27, has no idea if he owns the passage or not. :lol:

Would it be expensive to pay a conveyancer to get a definitive answer?
 
DoctorMick said:
There is nothing about the passage in the title deeds for 27. There isn't a digital copy of the plan for 27 available for some reason so I'm waiting for that to come through the post. Our landlord, who owns 27, has no idea if he owns the passage or not. :lol:

Would it be expensive to pay a conveyancer to get a definitive answer?
Click to expand...
I think you could get a view on it for a hundred quid or so. Or maybe even for nowt and then get charged only for the letter they send to 26 if they agree you have a right to use the passage. But they will tell you the fee before they proceed, so if you don't like the fee quote you can just leave it.
 
DoctorMick said:
There is nothing about the passage in the title deeds for 27. There isn't a digital copy of the plan for 27 available for some reason so I'm waiting for that to come through the post. Our landlord, who owns 27, has no idea if he owns the passage or not. :lol:

Would it be expensive to pay a conveyancer to get a definitive answer?
Click to expand...

Either Pm the postcode or put it on here and I'll have a look on mapsearch to get an indicative plan
 
DoctorMick said:
Thanks, that's much appreciated. TF8 7AD
Click to expand...

Definitely not a straightforward one....

From the plans and without seeing the titles is the alley to the left as you look at the front?

If so would I be right in saying that rooms from 26 are above the alley so to speak?

If the above is true I would say that the alley belongs to 27 anyway and you have a flying/creeping freehold
 
Hawkings Boots said:
Definitely not a straightforward one....

From the plans and without seeing the titles is the alley to the left as you look at the front?

If so would I be right in saying that rooms from 26 are above the alley so to speak?

If the above is true I would say that the alley belongs to 27 anyway and you have a flying/creeping freehold
Click to expand...
Yes, I think that's correct...there is definitely a flying freehold I just don't really know what that means. I'll double check if the rooms above the alley belong to 26 or 27. I've got copies of both the titles but I don't want to take the piss and put you out. :D
 
Last edited:
DoctorMick said:
Yes, I think that's correct...there is definitely a flying freehold I just don't really know what that means. I'll double check if the rooms above the alley belong to 26 or 27. I've got copies of both the titles but I don't want to take the piss and put you out. :D
Click to expand...

Flying (or creeping) freehold just means that you own land or property that is above (or below) land that you don't own. Like here it looks like the rooms are above the alleyway which would lead me to the alley being included with 27.

Does the title for 26 include something like 'as to the parts tinted blue on the title plan only the first floor is included'?
 
(22.11.1989) The Freehold land shown edged with red on the plan of the
above Title filed at the Registry and being 26 High Street, Ironbridge,
Telford, (TF8 7AD).
NOTE 1: As to the part numbered 1 on the filed plan only the first and
second floor is included in the title.
NOTE 2: As to the part numbered 2 on the filed plan only the first
floor is included in the title.
NOTE 3: As to the part numbered 3 on the filed plan only the second
floor is included in the title.
NOTE 4: As to the part numbered 4 on the filed plan only the cellar
first and second floor is included in the title.
NOTE 5: The mines and minerals together with ancillary powers of
working are excepted with provision for compensation in the event of
damage caused thereby.
Click to expand...
Refers to numbers rather than colours but 1, 2, 3 & 4 are all above the alley way. It's a very weird building the way it's been split out! :lol:
 

Back
Top