Prev: Forgive me father, for I have very nearly sinned
Next: Petseal etc.
From: Catman on 6 Jun 2010 15:16
Pip Luscher wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 18:49:14 +0000 (UTC), crn(a)NOSPAM.netunix.com wrote:
>
>> Pip Luscher <pluscher(a)live.invalid.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Interesting. Where do you get that figure from, cos this is up for 75k
>>>> an acre. At 5k an acre, I'd write them a cheque.
>>> A few years ago I bought about three anna half acres for twelve K. But
>>> this is pure agricultural land in the wilds of Suffolk, with no direct
>>> road access (there is a private track that I have right of access
>>> through though).
>>>
>>> For a plot in a village with roadside access and the prospect of it
>>> maybe getting PP I'd expect it to be much, much higher. Also, as a
>>> rough rule, the smaller the plot, the higher the cost per acre.
>> If it is in the middle of a village it is unlikely to be Green Belt but
>> there could be other reasons that it cannot be built on. Have words
>> with the local planning officer and importantly the planning member
>> of the Parish Council.
>> Also check for restrictive covenants on the deeds.
>
> I'd agree, all quite possible.

<quote>
The site lies opposite residential housing and is designated within the
Greenbelt and any development would be subject to planning.
</quote>

Oh, and let us not forget that Church
> thing (I forget the proper name), where if it was once err, some sort
> of Church owned land, then the new landowner could find themselves
> quite legitimately being expected to pay tens of thousands towards the
> new Church roof. Or something like that; I forget the exact details. I
> think you can take out insurance against this sort of thing though.
>

Would be just as well.

> Of course, it *could* have been owned by some old dear who has finally
> shuffled off this mortal coil, or maybe there was wrangling over who
> actually owned it. Either case is somewhat unlikely though.

I think I shall have to talk to the agents.


--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
From: Catman on 6 Jun 2010 15:17
Pip Luscher wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 19:43:42 +0100, Catman
> <catman(a)rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Pip Luscher wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 17:47:05 +0100, Catman
>>> <catman(a)rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> For a plot in a village with roadside access and the prospect of it
>>> maybe getting PP I'd expect it to be much, much higher. Also, as a
>>> rough rule, the smaller the plot, the higher the cost per acre.
>>>
>> Interesting. It's got road frontage, and is being sold as a series of plots.
>
> It's a way of tempting people into paying over the odds in the hope
> they'll get planning permission one day.
>

I can relate to that.

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
From: SIRPip on 6 Jun 2010 15:17
SIRPip wrote:

> A.Lee wrote:
>
> > A bit of land came up for sale near to me 3 years ago, around an
> > acre in size. Horses had been kept on it, and it was only for sale
> > as agricultural/horse land - green belt, so no chance of building.
> > I fancied it for shooting etc, so rang and asked the guide price,
> > expecting up to �10k.
> > I thought she said �8000 when asked. I said "I'll put an offer in
> > then, I thought it may be a bit more than 8000".
> > She replied, "No,it is �80,000."
> > Apparently, horsey folk buy it for their own horses use, then rent
> > out 2 or 3 stables to others, and it usually pays for itself after
> > 10 years. With it being right at the edge of a reasonably affluent
> > village, there was no shortage of people wanting to buy a local
> > field to keep their horse in.
>
> A mate of mine bought a new house on the edge of a Mid-Beds village -
> nice house, in the way of 'luxury developments' - 4/5 beds, 3 baths,
> detached double garage, that sort of thing. Anyway: the builder had
> fucked up and cut himself off from two potential plots at the back, so
> when Big Andy had moved in, the builder turned up on the doorstep and
> a deal was struck for the "paddock" behind his house - for 7.5k.
>
> He was almost immediately approached by a burd from a cottage down the
> road, who wondered if she could "graze her horse" on his verdant
> pasture. She paid him, as did another couple of horsey locals - then
> they asked if they could build stables (for themselves - and another
> few horsey locals) along two sides, and if he would mind if they
> arranged for a water supply. They paid him for the stabling.
>
> Five years later ... he paid his house off at Christmas.
>
> He thought he'd be good for beerandfags level cash, but it growed like
> Topsy and now he's the proud owner of what looks like a livery stable
> complete with a very popular muckheap (for the output of which the
> allotmenteers pay him), a ride-on mower for when the horses can't keep
> it down and, best of all, since the owners of the house next door got
> fucked off and settled the umpty-ninth insurance claim for horsey
> types taking lumps out of their garage with badly-reversed horseboxes
> - they've demolished the garage, built a new one on the other side of
> their house and sold Andy that bit of land for access to the paddock.
>
> This means he now has access to the building plot that was denied in
> the first place. I think he's going to retire shortly.



--
SIRPip : B12
From: Pip Luscher on 6 Jun 2010 15:20
On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:16:37 +0100, Catman
<catman(a)rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> wrote:

>Oh, and let us not forget that Church
>> thing (I forget the proper name), where if it was once err, some sort
>> of Church owned land, then the new landowner could find themselves
>> quite legitimately being expected to pay tens of thousands towards the
>> new Church roof. Or something like that; I forget the exact details. I
>> think you can take out insurance against this sort of thing though.
>>
>
>Would be just as well.

Your solicitor can just do a search for it (at a price of course); if
it doesn't show up then no worries and no need for pre-emptive
insurance.

>> Of course, it *could* have been owned by some old dear who has finally
>> shuffled off this mortal coil, or maybe there was wrangling over who
>> actually owned it. Either case is somewhat unlikely though.
>
>I think I shall have to talk to the agents.

--
-Pip
From: Grimly Curmudgeon on 6 Jun 2010 19:27
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Pip Luscher
<pluscher(a)live.invalid.co.uk> saying something like:

>I'd agree, all quite possible. Oh, and let us not forget that Church
>thing (I forget the proper name), where if it was once err, some sort
>of Church owned land, then the new landowner could find themselves
>quite legitimately being expected to pay tens of thousands towards the
>new Church roof. Or something like that; I forget the exact details.

Christ, yes.
The bloke who dug his heels in and refused to pay the ten grand got
lumbered with all the costs and is fucked for �400K now.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Forgive me father, for I have very nearly sinned
Next: Petseal etc.