The updated TA6 property information form, released by the Law Society in the past week, places a new onus on vendors to be clearer about the risks posed by the incursion onto the property of Japanese Knotweed, and failure to properly identify the risk could lead to more claims warns CLS Property Insight, who point to the updated wording on the new TA6 Property Information Protocol forms.
Introduced in the 3rd edition of the form, question 7.8 asks about whether the property is ‘affected’ by Japanese Knotweed, and if so, whether there is a management plan in place. The responses are ‘Yes’, ‘No’ and ‘Not Known’.
The updated wording in the 4th edition, at question 23.3 of the TA6, extends the obligations on vendors to identify whether there is Japanese Knotweed present not only inside the boundary of the property, but ‘an area adjacent to or abutting the boundary.’ The Law Society explanatory notes for sellers and buyers go on to state that, ‘if you choose ‘No’ as an answer, you must be certain that, even if you cannot see any growth above ground, no rhizome (root) is present in the ground of the property or within three metres of the property boundary.’
“These updated requirements make a definitive response much more difficult”
says Kelly McDonnell, National Sales Manager at CLS Property Insight.
“Where historically you might see the response to the question as being a definitive ‘Yes’ or ‘No’, the expectation on homeowners to be aware of the existence of Japanese Knotweed beyond the edges of their boundary makes it more challenging to be conclusive.”
Japanese knotweed is an invasive weed that can cause subsidence and cracking to property. While there is no legal obligation to remove it from a property, those who allow it to spread into the wild can face prosecution. The removal of the weed can be lengthy and costly.
Around 1.45million homes are estimated to be affected by Japanese Knotweed throughout the UK and homes that are impacted can be devalued anywhere from 5-20%; in extreme cases this can be much much more.
“And with the new material information requirements placing responsibilities on vendors to proactively provide more information at the outset of the transaction that would affect any decision to move forward with a purchase, the time and cost associated with the removal of Japanese Knotweed might be considered something which could affect a transactional decision”
McDonnell adds
“If a purchaser subsequently has to deal with an invasion of Japanese Knotweed and the TA forms have said there isn’t any on the property, the liability lies with the vendor. It is then for the purchaser to take legal action against them which would likely run into thousands of pounds of legal costs. It will be interesting to see what case law would develop.”
“Much like the risks posed by non-compliant building regulations, build-over agreements, or absence of easements, firms may be minded to remind their clients of the availability of insurances to cover not only the costs of remediation but also any diminution in value of the property which protect the purchaser and firm.”
3 responses
Has the TA6 form been revised by Insurance Brokers so they can attempt to sell more indemnity policies which will never need to be used as they have realised their profits are reducing now Chancel repair indemnity policies are fading into history ….
HI Angela, although I do work for indemnity provider CLS Property Insight may I feedback from a personal perspective. I can tell you that had affordable knotweed indemnity policies been available during my last house move (in 2016) it would have been considerable less expensive than the four figure knotweed remediation project I subsequently had to pay for. Winter house moves when the plant is not visible do expose homebuyers and sure enough, our knotweed popped out of the ground as spring arrived. I realise there are many topics conveyancers deal with which seem to be beyond ‘legal’ however, blanket statements about the ‘motivation’ of indemnity providers may sometimes lead to something of real protective value for a homebuyer not being bought to their notice.
Have any members of the Law Society Conveyancing and Land Law Committee placed their heads above the paparpet yet? If they did they’d be shot.
From the LS website –
This committee:
reviews and promotes improvements in all branches of land law, conveyancing procedure and practice and related matters, with a focus on both commercial and residential property
responds to consultation documents from, and engages with, outside bodies including the government, Law Commission, HM Land Registry, RICS, UK Finance and the Building Societies Association
helps the profession to adapt to anticipated changes in the conveyancing market including connected regulatory changes
promotes solicitors as the leading providers of quality conveyancing services. including helping the Law Society develop conveyancing products or services
provides practical help and expert technical guidance to the profession through the production of practice notes, articles and other communications
provides both a free pool of specialist expertise and a representative sounding board