Indemnity policy/adverse possession issue

[Garyf123]

Hi, Looking for some advice please!

The railway cottage we are trying to buy, has a portion of garden and a garage in the physical boundary but outside the legal boundary. It has been like this for at least 25 years. The land, i believe is unregistered but possibly/probably owned by Network Rail. The sellers solicitor has provided an indemnity policy but when i looked at the exclusions, it stated that "this policy excludes claims made by or on behalf of Network Rail/National rail"

This to me seems like either a mistake or a total rip-off as they are charging £450.00 for it. The only issue that is going to occur is with Network Rail so why issue policy excluding this?

As a side note, can adverse possession be claimed if the previous owners  (2 then us) total 25 years or does it have to be 12 years from when we purchase?

 

Many thanks in advance,

 

Gary. 

[TommoUK]

If the land is outside your legal title but inside the physical boundary, what affect on value would this have if it were taken away?  The policy presumably protects you for claims made my anyone else other than the railway who has a potential claim of ownership and/or other rights (rights of way etc) 

 

The indemnity policy may be a requirement of your bank, if value has been apportioned to this part of land for which the loan has been given?

 

If it's within your boundary, fenced off and there are no other rights of way footpaths etc and not near the railway you may decide you have a decent claim for adverse possession if you have sworn statement of possession by the previous owners(s). On the other hand it may be open to the railway on one side and therefore in theory easy to see how it could be considered inside the railway estate? or there may have been a previous approach to the railway which has alerted them to the ownership query and caused the insurer to exclude them from the policy.

 

Also bear in mind that as part of the claim for adverse possession the Land Registry would potentially contact the Railway and ask if they had any objection to the claim. So rather than poking a potential hornets nest you may be better off enjoying the use of the enlarged garden without making a claim.  The policy allows you to satisfy your bank and sell on to others in the future.

 

Finally, I believe the railways have statutory powers.  Another reason for the policy exclusion?  and even if you did own the land, the railway could use powers to enter and carry out works etc.

[Mike]

On 02/01/2025 at 20:01, Garyf123 said:

"this policy excludes claims made by or on behalf of Network Rail/National rail"

This to me seems like either a mistake or a total rip-off as they are charging £450.00 for it. The only issue that is going to occur is with Network Rail so why issue policy excluding this?

Because railways are a special case. Under the Railway Regulation Act 1840 refusing to leave railway land a criminal offence. Adverse possession of their land is therefore never valid.

 

See also https://www.justanswer.com/uk-law/bexl6-understand-can-t-claim-adverse-possession-railway.html