[Citrine]

I'm currently in the process of buying a property with land.

The vendors are retaining a piece of land across the road from the property and our solicitor has advised of a clause in the contract stating... “The seller will have the right to carry out farming operations on their retained land even if in doing so it interferes with your use of the property.”

Is this type of clause standard for rural property?

Would it put you off purchasing a property with this clause attached (asking in case we buy property and later need to sell it)?

Apparently they will be undertaking normal farming activities which I'm 100% happy with but solicitor has acknowledged there could be risk attached if the land is sold on as the clause will still apply.

I guess I'm really trying to determine if the stress of moving / relocating my business is making me over-react and panic! 

[Backinwellies]

Cant see how you could stop any neighbour 'farming' in fields opposite you ......  how that would impact on you I guess that depends on what they are farming .....  noise smell  vehicles etc would be normal.  Thye could errect a large barn in your view I guess .... but then so could any owner.

Has your solicitor given any guidance as to why this has been put in?

[Womble]

The way that's worded, it sounds like "we have the right to do whatever we like, and you have no right to complain because we told you so".

I'd try to get that changed to moderate the language, so for instance: The seller will have the right to carry out normal farming operations on their retained land, provided access to the property is maintained at all times..... (etc - work with your solicitor to define what would be unreasonable behaviour on their part, and then stop them from gaining the right to do it!).

[arobwk]

At face value, the clause does seem a bit odd.  Agri' land is agri' land allowing the owner to do whatever they wish if the use is agricultural.  Both Backinwellies and Womble are right:  press your solicitor to press the vendors solicitor for clarification or modification.
I am inclined to ask though;  how close is the domestic part of the property (for sale) to the retained land across the road and, also, how close is the access to the property (for sale) to the access to the retained land ?? 

(Might be that the vendor is protecting against "city-folk" buying the property who then complain about smells, animal noises, muck etc.  Folk not brought up in the countryside don't always understand what countryside living can be like and then complain about their neighbours' agricultural activities - as many forum members will know from experience !  Maybe this sort of clause will become more common post-Covid and with increasing city-to-countryside migration !?)

[Fleecewife]

I don't think the sellers would have bothered to put that clause unless they had something up their sleeves which they don't want to be open about.  There are all sorts of agricultural activities which could drive you potty if they're right in your face.  Intensive pig keeping for example - smell and screaming at feeding time.  Intensive poultry units - the constant noise of extractor fans even 1/4 mile away can be intrusive, then there's smell too. A livery would mean lots of extra traffic, horse boxes etc. A farmer near us has decided to branch out into some kind of woodworking and we spend our Sundays trying to hide from the noise of  screaming bandsaws


Were it me I would not sign unless I had a full explanation and the wording was changed by a solicitor who understands agricultural work and devious minds.

[Citrine]

Thanks to everyone who has replied - I really appreciate the responses.

The clause has raised alarm bells and I just wanted to make sure I'm not over reacting due to the stress of moving / a recent family bereavement and my husband's tooth extraction last week (which was probably the most stressful!!)

[member=2128]Womble[/member] and [member=152775]arobwk[/member] Yes, I did wonder if they thought we could potentially be a pain in the backside and wanted to shut down any issues before they arise.

[member=4333]Fleecewife[/member] my immediate concern was that they had something up their sleeve! I did ask for confirmation and was told it would be normal farming activities. Not sure why they thought this might be an issue as we advised them that we wanted the land to graze sheep.

I think that I will have to go back to the solicitor and advise that it's the deal breaker clause   I do worry that we won't find anywhere else we can afford as prices have increased tremendously over the last 2 months.

[Citrine]

Has your solicitor given any guidance as to why this has been put in?

No, he wasn't sure why it was put in either.

[Glencairn]

I don't think the sellers would have bothered to put that clause unless they had something up their sleeves which they don't want to be open about.  There are all sorts of agricultural activities which could drive you potty if they're right in your face.  Intensive pig keeping for example - smell and screaming at feeding time.  Intensive poultry units - the constant noise of extractor fans even 1/4 mile away can be intrusive, then there's smell too. A livery would mean lots of extra traffic, horse boxes etc. A farmer near us has decided to branch out into some kind of woodworking and we spend our Sundays trying to hide from the noise of  screaming bandsaws


Were it me I would not sign unless I had a full explanation and the wording was changed by a solicitor who understands agricultural work and devious minds.

I'd like to give you two likes for that reply. Having seen a pig keeping endeavour completely stink out their near neighbours.

[Citrine]

I'd like to give you two likes for that reply. Having seen a pig keeping endeavour completely stink out their near neighbours.

  I think my house purchase may fall through!!!

[Womble]

....... unless you can get perfectly reasonable assurances from the seller.

Remember, they need you as much as you need them. If they really do have nothing to hide, they should be reasonable with you, since if you walk away, the next person will only raise the same issues.

[Glencairn]

I'd like to give you two likes for that reply. Having seen a pig keeping endeavour completely stink out their near neighbours.

  I think my house purchase may fall through!!!

But in that case there was an agricultural shed there and the smallholding across the road did not own anything on that side of the road, so that example is not directly transferable to you. It's worth considering though, because the squeals are eerie, and I would say not what you want on your doorstep.

[arobwk]

[member=178404]Citrine[/member] - sounds to me that your solicitor is just being lazy if they haven't already pressed the vendor's for clarification on this matter ! 

[Not directly related, but to demonstrate the laziness of solicitors:  the vendors agents and my solicitor told me that my land was subject to "Overage" for any/all future non-agricultural developments achieving Planning Permission. That wasn't right - no one bothered to carefully read/think about the actual covenants other than me !! ]

Don't let your solicitor be lazy;  really press your solicitor (or engage another) to sort out, with the vendor's solicitor, what the proposed "condition" actually means regarding your prospective purchase !

To note also that any new agri' developments involving the housing of animals within 400m of a residential building are not (normally) permitted.  Extremely unlikely that, as examples, a new in-door piggery development or new over-wintering animal sheds would receive PP if within 400m of a domestic property owned by someone else.  Obviously for you to check the validity of my comments above, but I offer my understandings for you to throw into the mix as you consider your prospective property purchase.

[Citrine]

[member=152775]arobwk[/member] Thanks for the info - I will definitely investigate the planning conditions.

I have drafted an email to send to the solicitor seeking to have the clause removed and seeking further assurance about the plans for the retained land and how it may affect our purchase. 

Thanks everyone for the comments

[Fleecewife]

Do let us know the outcome Citrine and I hope the sellers back down about that clause.

[Citrine]

The vendors came back having amended the clause... they changed the word 'use' to 'enjoyment'.

We have decided to walk away as it was one compromise too many.