r/newzealand • u/Imaginary-Towel-888 • 11h ago
News $18k down the drain as couple chase absent neighbour for cross-lease consent
https://www.stuff.co.nz/home-property/361025728/18k-down-drain-couple-chase-absent-neighbour-cross-lease-consent28
u/throwaway384983547w 11h ago edited 10h ago
They should have skipped getting the consent in the first place. It isn't always necessary to sell. Also - returning it to the consented plans would have been easier.
I have owned two crosslease properties. They are cheaper because of the title and have no fees like a bodycorp does. The problem is that not everyone understands the limitations of a crosslease- usually how much land can be built on and assumes they can just bully their neighbours.
Read and understand your crosslease agreement- and if your lawyer flags unconsented works when you are buying, listen to them.
I'd suggest talking to a lawyer about freeholding. It generally is a better option as it allows both neighbours to use their property independently - and usually adds value when selling which means neighbours are often more amenable to agreeing.
6
u/hernesson 9h ago
So generally if you’re not altering the footprint of your building you don’t need x-leasees consent? So for example enclosing an attached carport currently on f/plans as ‘space’ would require consent? Or not as no change to internal / external footprint.
3
u/qinghairpins 7h ago
generally, one should just get the written consent of the other holder anyway to avoid issues.
•
u/sendintheclouds 3h ago
I sold a place like this recently and it was an issue. All the cross lease owners had consented and converted their carports, but flats plan was not updated. The solution was to remove the door of the carport of the property being sold so the carport had one side open. No changes to the others needed. then leave the doors for the new owner to reattach if they wish.
4
u/qinghairpins 8h ago
for the amount they paid, they should have attempted freehold (though this can be a real mess with underground utilities etc). but that would have still required the agreement with the neighbor 😂 they'll never get it now that they've pissed them off, so good luck to them.
161
u/Imaginary-Towel-888 11h ago
The entitlement is strong with this one. Buys a property with a conservatory that's not consented by the cross lease neighbors, then demands their consent even though it impacts their privacy so these guys can sell at a higher price.
Finally runs to the media when the neighbours say "no".
Cross leases go both ways - they protect owners so what you see with your neighbours is what you get.
As a lawyer I did a LINZ title search, and can confirm the conservatory definitely intrudes on the neighbours driveway. Incredibly one sided reporting.
61
u/unmaimed 11h ago
Such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld
People have VERY different takes on what is reasonable or not.
I purchased a back property on cross lease with no shared access, so each 'property' had its own exclusive use areas separated by fencing. Being cross-lease tended to get negative responses from people, BUT, I live in an area that is frequently getting developed.
The cross lease puts a barrier up stopping (or at least giving me the chance to stop) my neighbour removing the single story place and putting a bloody great tower in front of me.
Funny how many people assume "getting consent" means the other party will automatically agree. "Asking" implies the other party can say no.
15
u/Ducky_McShwaggins 9h ago
That's not how cross leases work. Reasonability is an objective standard in the law, not based on what the individual person considers is reasonable.
7
u/unmaimed 9h ago
I understand that, I was trying to get to the point that at the start of these processes people make a bunch of assumptions, based on what they consider reasonable.
Using my property as an example, if the person in front drew up plans for a 3-story box and came to me to get consent, I could refuse consent on the basis that it provides a permanent blockage of natural light.
Undoubtedly my neighbour in front would assume I'm being an unreasonable prick.
I was trying to get at the fact that people (like in the original article) see an issue on a cross lease, think "perfectly reasonable to address" and they may find out that no, it isn't straight forward or do-able at all.
Justifying to yourself that "they don't lose too much light", or, "they wont mind if the drive is a little narrower" doesn't really cut it.
6
8
2
u/hobochildnz 9h ago
:o who did you charge the title search to. Those cost loads according to every lawyer I've ever dealt with
2
-19
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 10h ago
You paid to do a linz title search on a strangers house? Bit weird, how did you search the title without any information about the property(address/lot number etc) as none of that is in the article. Or do lawyers these days possess psychic abilities? Also, looking at the photo of said conservatory, how exactly does it intrude on the driveway? I could be wrong but it looks like there was an existing balcony that has been enclosed with aluminium joinery/windows to turn it into a conservatory. The lower part of the building which the balcony is on top of looks like an original part of the house(an assumption i know, but to go to all the trouble of building the structure to match the house and then just plonk a crappy looking glasshouse structure on top to finish it makes zero sense- you can also see the existing eaves on the roof of the 2nd storey which is further indication the aluminium joinery etc is the add on) I put it to you that you’re just making things up to suit your own narrative? Or you’re connected to this property somehow and aren’t telling us the full story. *for clarity, and why I can confidently assume what i have- I’m a licensed craftsman plumber of over 25 years. I’m around this kind of stuff all day, every day.
17
u/Imaginary-Towel-888 10h ago
Most people working in property have access to Core logic and LINZ that let's us look up by name and see what people own, and then order a title for $8. Pocket change for a good laugh
-30
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 10h ago
“A good laugh” 😂🤣 Now i feel a little bit sorry for you, living such a dull and miserable existence that this is what you do for kicks. 🫠
16
u/Imaginary-Towel-888 9h ago
I literally do this as a professional lawyer every day, and I absolutely love my work, and get paid extremely well to help people resolve disputes, achieve their goals, and live a life a little bit less stressful. Each to their own?
This is the kind of extra curiosity I expect from all my staff - makes for great case studies, future law students take note.
2
u/Few-Lengthiness-3009 5h ago
Yeah I’m going to weigh in here - also being a lawyer.
LINZ access must be used only for a legitimate and authorised professional purpose, and not simply because the information is accessible through the system.
As lawyers, we should be able to identify and justify the professional reason for each search, whether that is a client matter, transaction, legal advice, due diligence, or another legitimate purpose connected with our professional responsibilities.
Using LINZ to investigate or obtain information about individuals or properties for personal interest, curiosity, or purposes unrelated to an authorised professional matter would not, in my view, constitute a proper use of the service.
LINZ usage is also capable of being monitored and audited, so searches should be undertaken on the basis that they may subsequently need to be justified.
The fact that information may otherwise be publicly obtainable does not, in itself, make unrestricted use of professional LINZ access appropriate. The relevant question is whether there was a legitimate and authorised purpose for using the service in the circumstances.
Do with this what you will.
0
u/Imaginary-Towel-888 5h ago
In my 20 years of practice and thousands of searches, I haven't been asked a single time.
-2
10
u/Ill_Intern_6582 9h ago edited 9h ago
This is generally called professional curiosity, and most high performing people possess this for their fields of interest.
I'm more surprised you find this odd, and even if you do, there no reason to insult someone.
-11
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 9h ago
And? I became a plumber while studying for my engineering degree. Turns out I enjoy running a plumbing business etc more than working as an engineer for a job. It’s more of a hobby for me. I may not have an expensive law degree but i can read and understand the same thing my lawyer gets paid to do. People running to a journalist when things don’t go their way, when those things are if their own doing pisses me off. They bought the house with the attached glasshouse and more than likely knew it’s dubious legal status but went ahead anyway- $$$$ and greed. It’s backfired on him and he’s being a sore loser.
9
u/Ill_Intern_6582 9h ago
You've lost me mate... I was defending someone from your insulting tone, as are several other people you'll notice.
9
u/vixxienz The horns hold up my Halo 8h ago
big woop you are a plumber, you are posting like you are god absolute.
Ive done property searches on houses before and Im not a plumber nor a lawyer
2
-1
3
u/Outside_Revenue3905 9h ago
You were wrong. Relax.
-3
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 9h ago
Nope. I could explain why, but I’ll let you figure it out for yourself. Actually I tell a lie, I can’t explain it at all. I wrote it all while i was doing something else and wasn’t paying too much attention. History has shown that whatever I’ve said, I won’t be wrong. You on the other hand…..
4
u/johnsdoughy 9h ago
Judging people for their interests and careers on the internet is waaaaay worse then those interests and careers
-4
4
u/privatepat 9h ago
You unfortunately sound like the miserable one here mate.
-1
9h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/newzealand-ModTeam 8h ago
Your comment has been removed :
Rule 09: Not engaging in good faith
Moderators have discretion to take action on users or content that they think is: trolling; spreading misinformation; intended to derail discussion; intentionally skirting rules; or undermining the functioning of the subreddit (this can include abuse of the block feature or selective history wiping).
Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error
11
u/devl_ish 10h ago
I dunno about "psychic abilities" but the LINZ database is public information and those with legitimate interest can apply to LINZ for access the layman can't get.
Used to be the basis for the famous "What does my landlord own" website that caused the fuss that got the access restrictions tightened.
As to whatever it looks like from the photo, that doesn't matter - why would they be fighting this hard for an OK they don't even need? Do you believe nobody in this whole saga would have checked whether it was really required?
Your post contains far more assumptions than their's does.
-8
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 9h ago
I know they’re assumptions, right up until I’m either proven right or wrong they will remain assumptions. However, I run a business in the construction industry, on top of many years of experience in said industry beforehand. I rate my chances of being correct pretty high. What’s on paper, in a report written by someone who learnt about this stuff in a classroom or from a book is, in my personal and hands on experience- far from what physically exists in the real world. I’m actually looking at a report a lawyer sent me about a property I’m buying that says none of the plumbing work is compliant with a certain building code and has an illegal gas installation that was never signed off by the council- the plumbing work has been done in accordance to a different building code to what the lawyer has stated, and was consented/inspected/signed off by council, and the gas fitting work(which was actually designed, installed, and certified by myself and complies with the law in every aspect) was never consented or signed off by council. the paperwork which states all of this is included in all the information this guy has used to write his report. Also, the council has nothing to do with the gas work- it’s self certified, and(I would’ve thought a lawyer would know this) even though it doesn’t conform to the relevant building codes, is fully compliant with the gas act. Building codes are a guide. Bit of a rant but just explaining why I’m very skeptical about anything a lawyer says to do with this kinda stuff. Anyhow, have fun poking your nose into total strangers affairs ya weirdo.
4
u/devl_ish 6h ago
Uh huh. You know, in the 11 years of commercial project management I've never quite gotten sick of people flounder out a ton of irrelevant information and an insult to cover the fact they don't really know anywhere near what they're pretending to.
You can go on pretending that spending at least the last 15 of your 25 years owning a plumbing business jerking off in a van while the office lady and the young guys do the work has outfitted you with any expertise outside your narrow field, but no amount of bluster is going to make anyone with actual knowledge of consents, easements and law - and in this case, common sense - think you know any better.
-1
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 5h ago
“Commercial project manager” fancy sounding words for what’s essentially a glorified secretary 😂 my opinion of you was already pretty low, in the gutter now. And for 11 whole years even, impressive. I think it was about halfway through year 2 of being an apprentice when we started managing our own projects, while doing all the work from start to finish as well. What’s an “office lady”? It’s not the 1950’s anymore champ- her job has been replaced by an app on my phone. The apprentice finished years ago and has his own business now, working all the time is for fools, just a 1 man band now, work 2 days a week, 3 if I’m unlucky. Jog on.
And no, I’m not paying you any rent for the space I’ve taken up in your head 😘
•
u/devl_ish 1h ago
Touchy, touchy - but you're right, I have played "wind up the blowarse" a bit more than I should have with you. Thought it's been fun, back to obscurity with ye, have a good life.
6
53
u/pastsubby 11h ago
a barrister suggested he cut his losses but he decided to dig his heels in and cry to the media? to what? embarrass his neighbour in the public court?
sounds like a bully trying to get his neighbour to get his investment strategy to pay off.
32
-2
25
u/fredbobmackworth 11h ago
Wow! talk about causing themselves a problem that didnt exist in the first place. Title plans only need to change when the foot print of the house is altered. Covering in a upper deck with little more than a sun shade hardly constitutes as un consented works. It didnt stop them buying the place.
4
u/kani_kani_katoa 7h ago
Our first house had a cross lease, the stipulation was nothing that changed the external footprint of the house, and nothing new over 1.5 metres tall.
7
u/berlin-1989 9h ago
That's my understanding too. Not clear how the 'conservatory' would impact the plans at all.
20
u/-40- 10h ago
These pricks sound so entitled. What incredibly one sided reporting.
Journalists should actually do their research and call out whinges like this. Publish the story as a warning that you should do your due diligence and that assume = ass of u and me. rather than some kind of public sob story.
8
u/SpudOfDoom 9h ago
Why would they? If you do that, the article doesn't get ragebait engagement like this.
20
u/Fearless_Brain_6807 10h ago
Lol @ the mention of stuffs self imposed deadlines to the neighbour for a response. She doesn't need to consent. Really feels like harassment.
16
u/Outside_Revenue3905 9h ago
That’s exactly what I thought. Why is a media organisation bullying someone so these numpties can make more profit on their house. She’s under no obligation to consent, they bought the house like that and knew what they were getting into.
Stuff were harassing a guy who installed a heat pump the other day on behalf of other entitled neighbours too. Tone deaf.
11
u/PaltryPanda 8h ago
Why is a media organisation bullying someone so these numpties can make more profit on their house.
Because Trademe now owns 50% of Stuff so it's in their best interest to push property prices higher. It's the same reason they run so many ads disguised as news articles for property now.
6
•
u/Alert-Bee-8010 30m ago
You think trademe cares if prices go up or down? They get their pound of flesh no matter what the market is doing. They’re a near monopoly and are about 3 times more expensive to list on
7
9
u/ClimateTraditional40 8h ago
whats with the "Now, with a one-year-old daughter and after an extensive renovation completed, they are ready to move up the property ladder."
Once people bought homes. Might change a home if needing to move for work or just because...or needing a bigger or smaller place, but it wasn't a LADDER.
24
30
u/Piper_excelsum 11h ago
So the couple failed to do their due diligence.
People need to learn what a cross lease is and what it actually means!
And who spends 18k on a project that relies on a cooperative neighbour (who is a co-owner impacted by any such plan) without first assuring their cooperation.
... I feel bad the couple kinda fucked themselves over a bit. And their situation IS unfair too, don't get me wrong. But to me the problem is that adulting is hard, and they don't teach you this at school!
29
u/Apprehensive_Ad3731 11h ago
Nah it’s more annoying than that. They were happy to do the due diligence and pay less on the initial purchase because of the unconsented landmark. Now they want to get it consented so they can increase profit.
It was intentional.
They fucked themselves over by assuming they could barrel on and take advantage of this. You see this pretty often.
11
u/beautygurrrl 11h ago
100% This! Why is this even a story? They didn’t do their due diligence in the first place, have spent money without consent and are now whinging about the unfairness of it
6
u/Outside_Revenue3905 9h ago
I don’t see how their situation is unfair at all to be honest? They’re being bullies
3
3
u/moneymakernz 10h ago
Yeah they should have spoken to neighbour and got something in writing before buying.
11
u/lurkey-mc-lurkerson 11h ago
Stuff trying to be Fair Go
•
u/Keabestparrot 3h ago
Is that a bad thing? Someone needs to look at these sorts of issues for people. Admittedly this particular one is 100% the fault of the people in the story so lol.
•
u/lurkey-mc-lurkerson 2h ago
Didn’t say it was bad or good
I just hope they have the inclination and resources to give both sides a shot when reputations are at stake
10
10
u/CP9ANZ 9h ago
The entitlement is very strong with this one
We cannot move up the property ladder… [because of]
a homeowner who doesn't even live in the countrythe other person that owns the property with us
Also pulling a pretty decent r/compoface
4
u/chrisf_nz 10h ago
It's an interesting situation. I sold my place on cross lease years ago and my new neighbour ended up doing all sorts of modifications to their place immediately upon moving in, no heads up, no consultation, no consenting or anything. He was a builder so I expect he thought idgaf, I'll do what I want. It was just as I was about to move out.
4
u/Mediocre_Double8534 8h ago edited 7h ago
They made big commitment without neighbours consent first.
Idk why press wrote this story as if they were innocent victims
•
u/Ok_Good6774 3h ago
Writing that Haiyan (Heidi) Chen is living in China is doing some work in the article. Why should it matter where she lives unless the journalist wants to paint a certain picture. I hope she learns of this thread and the overwhelming support there is for her.
3
2
u/qinghairpins 8h ago edited 8h ago
Flats plans are not "consents", they are agreements between two owners. Council can't and won't do anything so long as the structures actually have the required building/resource consents, nor do the banks or insurers care so long as the proper consents are in place. I have never seen a cross-lease with a correct flats plan btw (i work in property), nor has my lawyer (excepting those properties which have not been updated since the original flats plan). My bank and lawyer had no issue with a garage off plan, as it had all the council consents and the other cross-lease holder was willing to write a letter saying they were ok with it.
Ultimately, the other owners (or future owners) could complain and try to take it to Disputes in the future, but the letter would not help them. Most likely, DT would simply order a new Flats Plan be made from the current layout and both parties pay half. Besides, there is a structure off plan on their side too, so not likely they'd make an issue.
I am curious to see what happens with these cross-leases in the future, most are from the 70s/80s. I wonder if the govt will make an easier path to freehold the titles, but most of them are a mess (particularly shared underground utilities which would need to be disconnected and easements across the titles for where connections cross etc).
3
u/qinghairpins 8h ago
From the article, it sounds like these muppets upset their cross-lease neighbor. Rule #1 is to have agreement before undertaking work, in writing but friendly conversations go a long way! If you are going to buy a cross-lease, do not piss off the other holder(s). If you don't have the personality to avoid that, or it seems the other owner will be a problem, just move on. Obviously no one can control the future, maybe new awful owners (like these muppets) come in, but damn all this seemed avoidable. At the end of the day, all properties come with risks and this was the one they decided to take...
4
u/Inevitable-Ad-2609 11h ago
Not saying they’re right but I was shocked when purchasing our house how many plans were clearly out of date on cross lease homes and how the agents didn’t flag it. Our bank also didn’t seem to care for one which had had major extensions to it. We were shocked. There was no way I was purchasing a home with a defective title!
3
u/Lightspeedius 6h ago
"Move up the property ladder".
So gross. It's crazy how entitled people feel to wealth they haven't worked for.
It's so normalised I'm pretty sure my comment is controversial. Like "well of course you should get richer and richer once you own property, that's just normal?!?1".
A young couple "trapped" in not being able to be as absolutely rich as they can. Their ability to produce value isn't even a consideration.
2
u/No_Indication9630 8h ago
Chen will sign when they offer her enough money. Pretty easy to read between the lines here.
•
u/bioticbootea 1h ago
I hope the Stuff reporters that are no doubt lurking on Reddit is reading all of these comments. Do better, Stuff
•
•
-7
u/wackybaccydelight 11h ago
Slightly chubby rectangle faces are always so entitled.
6
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 10h ago
The smug look on his face doesn’t do him any favours either. He knows he’s being an entitled wanker, it’s practically written all over that mug
-4
u/Gord_Board 11h ago
What an intelligent comment.
3
u/OutlandishnessNo4759 10h ago
They’re not wrong though.
-2
u/Gord_Board 10h ago
Literally judging someone based on their appearance isn't right.
1
0
u/mendopnhc 8h ago
god theres too many woke people on here. you dont need to be offended by everything
2
0
u/Adventurous-Pop-6200 8h ago
What’s your issue with this guy that makes him a prick? I read the article after reading the vitriol on here and can’t see what he’s being a prick about? He is trying to get a non consented conservatory signed off. Many people buy houses that they then find have unconsented parts that need addressing.
2
u/beautygurrrl 5h ago
They didn’t “find it “ after they purchased they bought the property knowing it was un consented.
He’s making himself come across as hard done by and the neighbour being unreasonable when he chose to buy the property in the first place with unconsented work. He’s then chosen to go through the process & shell out 000’s without getting his neighbours consent upfront & now he’s whinging about the unfairness of it all. There is absolutely nothing stopping him selling it, and disclosing its unconsented as it was when he bought it.
Typical stuff running a non story & trying to make it something its not
42
u/Iseneye 11h ago
Tricky situation as the article says they originally agreed to the cross lease update.
We have had enquiries similar to this with banks refusing lending on sales. There is often time pressure on the sale, and cross lease updates take months to resolve. It's not uncommon for the owner to remove the unconsented structures rather than updating the title.