@greg-s?ÿ Thank you )
The daughter was alive and a child of 3 years old.
I have found that in fact it must be No 1 that the husband is willing to Claire.....
I have found Will that is Willing No 1 to claire's husband.
When Claire conveys No 1, it is a simple conveyance basically describing it as a house & garden with the rights, easements and appurtenances. Only Claire and the buyer sign the Conveyance. No trustees are party to it.
When Claire sells No 2, the trustees are involved and sign. I have tried to shorten it but I am so very confused as the conveyance seems to be talking about her husbands adjoining property as well. It's so very strange why the conveyance referrs to the husbands Willed property next door
The conveyance is made between Claire the Vendor, Agar & Hart the Trustees and Augustin the Purchaser. Under a Settlement made by the Will proved by all the executors named. The Vendor Claire was immediately before the 1st Jan 1926 entitled during her life to the possession of the hereditaments hereby conveyed AND WHEREAS the Trustees were at that time the persons who under the same settlement were the trustees for the purposes of the Settled Land Act 1925 AND WHEREAS by virtue of the Law of Property Act 1925 and the Settled Land Act 1925 the hereditaments hereby conveyed became on 1st Jan 1926 vested in Claire in fee simple at law AND WHEREAS by a vesting deed made between the Trustees and Claire of the other part the trustees declared that the hereditaments therein mentioned (being the hereditaments hereby conveyed) were vested in the Vendor upon the trusts and subject to the powers and provisions upon and subject to which under the settlement the same ought to be held from time to time And that the Trustees were the Trustees of the settlement for the purposes of the Settled Land Act 1925 AND WHEREAS the vendor in exercise of the power in this behalf conferred on her by the Settled Land Act 1925 as tenant for life of the hereditaments hereby conveyed has agreed to sell the unincumbered fee simple in possession of the said hereditaments to the Purchaser at the price of two hundred pounds NOW THIS DEED WITNESSETH as follows:-
- Claire as Beneficial Owner conveys unto the Purchaser ALL that messuage or dwellinghouse and garden with the rights easements and appurtenances known as Number 2 to the Purchaser in fee simple
- So far as regards the remainder or reversion expectant on the equitable estate of the Vendor in the hereditaments hereby assured and the title to and further assurance of the same hereditaments after her death the covenants on her part implied by virtue of the Law of Property Act 1925 shall extend only to the acts and defaults of the Vendor and persons now or hereafter claiming through or in trust for her
It is then signed by Claire, the trustees and the purchaser.
I loved reading your post and wish I had another coffee 🙂
When Claire sold No 1 & No 2 in 1927, the new purchaser then purchased the blue land from a farmer unrelated to the properties.
I understand OS maps can't be relied on for precission, but the party wall between the two properties is in the exact position where the OS Map I attached has recorded the roofline.?ÿ
Before the blue land was purchased (coloured red on the third map), I hope you can see how No 1 was pretty much landlocked from the rear without the usage of the land on No 2. The blue land was an orchard owned by the unrelated farmer. The conveyance for this land includes measurements.?ÿ
The party wall is in the same position today.
This is why I'm question if No 1 has acquired access rights/easements over this land including this buiding.....
If the owners of No 1 & No 2 are family and No 2 allows No 1 to use/occupy this building as a coal store and only form of water suppy as well as it's only rear exit etc for over 20 years, when No 1 comes to sell surely those usage/occupation rights would need to continue.
When No 1 is then conveyed with rights and easements, would this include their usge/occupation of that building if they have been doing so for over 20 with the permission/knowledge of No 2.
This building is single storey but it is attached to the rear external wall of No 2. Above it is ther rear bathroom wall/window/pipe work of No 2.?ÿ
If adverse possession could be likely this would in effect put No 2's rear wall etc in No 1's title.?ÿ
Sorry...?ÿ I do tend to ramble on
@chris-mills PS: ..... you got the map dates spot on 1892 for the 1st one, 1911 for the 2nd one which pretty much is a replica of the 1927 one.... you know your stuff 🙂
What is an earth closet??ÿ New term to me.
No worries....we asked the same whn we purchased our property....thankfuly it was no longer in use but still visible. I think it's basically an outside toilet with a hole where all 'the waste' goes into the ground or something like that 🙂
Can I ask what PLSSia is, as that is completely new to me?
@jay1980?ÿ
The Public Land Survey System (PLSS) is the system that was implemented across a large portion of the US for laying out a uniform means for the distribution from the US Government to private ownership.?ÿ Sections are squares with one mile length on each side with 160 acres per one-quarter section.
PLSSia is an invented term to describe this huge area.?ÿ The Colonial State system is the approach used in the early civilized portion of the US.?ÿ Many surveyors here from the US work in one area or of the other.?ÿ Some work in both areas of the country.?ÿ Then we have Texas which likes to think they are a country all by themselves so do not particularly follow either of the most common systems of surveying.
@jay1980?ÿ This discussion probably needs to move to private messaging, rather than clutter up the forum. I'll respond in the next day or so. In case you haven't used private messaging before you access by clicking the members name - left hand side of the post and that opens up their page - there's a "Send message" button at the top of that page.
Just to tidy up the public face of this thread:
Pairs of outbuildings (coal stores/outside toilets) are not uncommon on pre 1930s properties When they are side by side, with the join lying on the line of the adjacent houses they don't cause too much of a problem as the boundary is obvious (until one gets knocked down and you find there is only a half brick wall as the separating joint!). Biggest problem lies when they were built "out" from the party wall in a line, so that one was against the house wall and the other was further into the back yard. Each would have an access into the relevant back yard, but what happens if one is knocked down? (Easy if both go, as neighbours invariably draw a straight line boundary from the party wall of the houses.) This causes endless problems, especially if the back yard division is a fence (which may have moved to one corner of the outhouses over time) rather than a wall which normally would have stayed put.
One of the disadvantages of a land registration system which doesn't normally use too many dimensions or any coordinates. Happy new year to all.
