House built on wrong site?

Out of curiosity, a friend of mine checked her council's online planning map service to see where her house was. She found that the map (copyright OSI) had the site marked in red in a different area than her house was built back in 1993. Its a country area and the site was gifted from her father. Looking at the map. the house is split in two by the site boundary. Her brother inherited the farm when her dad died and he has now built on a site which they both thought was adjacent to her site. Nothing was said when he applied for and got planning permission.

Is this a major problem or can the matter be resolved by transferring land between them to rectify situation? I presume it would cause problems down the line if the house ever had to be sold?

In order to correct this she will have to apply for retention permission.

As the house is built more than 13 years the council cannot serve an enforcement notice, however it is and always will be, technically non compliant with planning permission and therefore in the long run she would probably be better off obtaining retention permission.

There is no point transferring more land to her as the house is not built in the right place in the first place.

Thanks for that, Vanilla. So am I correct in saying that until retention permission is recieved, the house could not be sold? Also, who owns the land that her house had been built on (half on intended site and half on brother's land)? Her or her brother or both?!

Welfarite- as I said because the house is built so long the council could not serve enforcement notices it is possible that she could find a cash buyer who would buy and take on the hassle of obtaining the permission themselves. Or maybe not. A lender probably would not lend on that basis so noone who would need a mortgage could buy. I have seen banks approve of lending where a shed needs retention in similar circumstances and not even require retention permission.
Ownership is a different thing. She should consult her land registry map- the planning map means nothing as regards ownership.

Sorry I was only half concentrating on that reply. I meant to add in relation to the shed that while a bank would lend on a purchase where only a shed was non compliant is is likely that they would insist on a house obtaining retention planning permission. So yes your friend could well find it hard to get someone to buy the house as is, or even remortgage.

Sometimes even if the planning map is wrong, ownership might be right. So your friend should check this first. If when she checks it is wrong then she can enter into a deed of rectification with her brother. This will not be stampable but there will be legal fees and land registry fees. If she has a mortgage her bank will probably have to join in the deed of rectification also. But it's not necessarily too difficult once her brother has no problem with doing it. Still the process can take a while so if she did have any immediate plans for selling she might want to start quickly.

Vanilla said:

Sometimes even if the planning map is wrong, ownership might be right. So your friend should check this first.

Click to expand...

Could it be that this online map could be wrong as it is not really the "planning map"? I've had a look at it and all it is is an aerial photo with a red boundary line superimposed on it in the wrong place according to where her house is (you can also see the house on the photo!).

Could it differ from the actual map and that maybe she has nothing to worry about?

Can she just call into planning dept of council to examine the original map?

Yes she should definitely examine the map first in the office to check it. She can just drop in but may be she should ring ahead as her file is more than 13 years old and might be stored somewhere?

Brillant, Vanilla, thanks for all the help.

Welfarite, I would first check the actual planning file in the Planning Dept. of the respective Council Council. The on-line planning search is not as reliable. I have recently come accross a case where the "Red Dot" was in a completely wrong position to the actual location of the property.