How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • Go back-and-forth until satisfied
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Joshua Your Own Question
Joshua
Joshua, Lawyer
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 31582
Experience:  LL.B (Hons), Higher Prof. Dip. Law & Practice
35043042
Type Your Law Question Here...
Joshua is online now

My question is about conveyancing and a TP1 form. We share a

This answer was rated:

Hi, my question is about conveyancing and a TP1 form. We share a septic tank with two of our neighbours, When we purchased our house we bought it from someone who is now one of our neighbours, He sold us his 4 bed house and they moved into a converted barn next door which has three bedrooms. They also owned a holiday let, that they lived in whilst they were converting their barn. The TPi dated 23rd January 2015 states that we have to pay 50% towards the repair, replace and emptying of septic tank. which we were fine with. Both ourselves and our neighbour who sold us the property had two occupants. He since sold the one bed holiday let to a couple, and changed the status to Residential, however he still expects us to pay the 50% charge on the original TP!. He has just replaced the tank and presented us with a bill of £10250 which we have to pay 50%. Can you advise if the TP1 would still stand bearing in mind there is now three residential properties, each with two occupants in each. Thank you.
JA: Where are you? It matters because laws vary by location.
Customer: Cornwall
JA: What steps have you taken so far?
Customer: To ask for costings, and just spoke to our neighbour who is requesting the deed percentage.
JA: Is there anything else the Lawyer should know before I connect you? Rest assured that they'll be able to help you.
Customer: No, othere than the map attaced to the TP1 said there was two residential properties, where there is now three.

Hello and thank you for your question. My name is ***** ***** I will be very pleased to assist you. I'm a practising lawyer in England with over 15 years’ experience. Please be aware that although I will endeavour to reply to you promptly, I am also in full time private practice and so I may not be available to respond immediately and it may also take me a few minutes to prepare a reply. The site will notify you as soon as I respond. I look forward to working with you to answer your question fully.

I am sorry to read of the above. May I clarify, you mention a one bedroom holiday cottage that has been sold. Was this property previously supplied by the septic tank at the time the transfer deed was signed or has it been connected to the system subsequent to that please?

Customer: replied 7 days ago.
Thank you. It was connected, as they lived in it prior to doing to doing up the barn.
Customer: replied 7 days ago.
We can carry on with the chat thank you.

thank you. So the position is that the tank was connected at the time to 3 properties but you agreed to the provision for a 50-50 share on the basis of the then occupancy of the properties. As your solicitor not advise you of the potential for inequity given that of course occupancy is more than likely to change over time?

Customer: replied 7 days ago.
Sorry to confuse you. Although the then holiday let was connected to the the tank, it is not certain that the barn conversion was. Certainly the water supply was not connected, so it is likely that the waste was also not connected. Can iI ask the question, that when the holiday let was sold as a residential property, should the deeds have been changed accordingly and if so who's responsability would that have been?

thank you. The question is one of something known as " enlargement". As at the status quo at the time you agreed the transfer deed, you would be bound by the terms of that transfer deed in terms of contribution. Accordingly, it follows that if the system was connected to 3 properties and you agreed a 50-50 contribution even if that was on a faulty assumption that the occupancy would remain as it was, at that time, then you would still be bound by this obligation. It is at least in part the job of your solicitor to advise you in this respect and potentially negotiate alternative terms.

If however the system was shared between two properties at the time and has since been expanded to  third a, then this would be enlargement and this will be a basis upon which to claim that the connection to a third property amounts to a derogation of your rights on the basis that the system is now serving more than the property is agreed originally and as a consequence, to depart from the contributions originally agreed.

accordingly, some investigation may be required and examination of the written terms of the transfer deed in order to establish the position clearly

Customer: replied 7 days ago.
Thank you very much. We feel that having to pay 50% to have the tank emptied when there is three properties each with two occupants at bit annoying.
I would quite agree with you. I'm glad the above answers all your questions for now. If you have any follow up questions please revert to me.

Customer: replied 7 days ago.
Thank you very much.

I'm glad the above is of some assistance.

I hope I was able to answer your question. If you would like to ask me another question in the future, you can add me as a favourite Expert. You'll have the option to do that on your "My Questions" page if you choose to rate our interaction or you can request me by name if you wish. Thank you again for visiting JustAnswer and see you again in the future I hope.

Joshua and other Law Specialists are ready to help you