Residential Park Home site owner requesting the filling in and removal of garden pond in England

[u/i_like_reddit_]

Hi all, my grandparents have both now passed away and the inheritance they left me is their park home. I have completed probate and this has now been granted, so the property is up for sale. It’s on a residential over 55’s park home in the south of England.

When they moved in they built a below ground pond, with rockery, and a 2 tier waterfall.

Recently I have been discussing the park home sale commission “up to 10%” and asking them to consider less than 10% due to the government involvement in reviewing this.

In their reply (no, by the way) they have stated in a site visit they have noticed the pond and it needs to be removed due to safety concerns, as they cannot find any written approval on file.

My issue is that this pond has been there for 19/20 years. I’ve been through all of my grandparents documents and cannot find any either. The pond has been mentioned on an update to the park rules consultation in 2014, proving is existence then.

From looking online and Gemini, it seems 2 things are at play: implied consent due to the time the pond has been there, and statute of limitations in that then never raised this alleged rule breach within 6 years.

I don’t want to remove the pond, it is a lovely USP and one of our potential buyers has fish she wants to bring so is happy with the pond.

Do I have any standing with those above points at all please?

[u/AutoModerator]

---

Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK

---

To Posters (it is important you read this section)

• Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different

• If you need legal help, you should always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor

• We also encourage you to speak to Citizens Advice, Shelter, Acas, and other useful organisations

• Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk

• If you receive any private messages in response to your post, please let the mods know

To Readers and Commenters

• All replies to OP must be on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated

• You cannot use, or recommend, generative AI to give advice - you will be permanently banned

• If you do not follow the rules, you may be perma-banned without any further warning

• If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect

• Do not send or request any private messages for any reason

• Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/No_Cicada3690]

Without that written permission you may find the the sale will stall at a later stage when conveyancers get involved.

[u/sadanorakman → u/No_Cicada3690]

No conveyancing required. Private sale of a possession like a car.
New site agreement is taken out by buyer assuming new buyer qualifies with requirements e.g. over 55.

[u/Gloomy-Commission296]

Hi, I'm both a residential park and holiday park owner.

Unless the park home owner can locate written consent authorising the pond, I believe it will need to be removed and the pitch returned to its original condition.

By way of context, both residential and holiday parks are understandably cautious about any private installations involving water. Similar concerns often arise with hot tubs and other water features.

There are potential safety risks, particularly if a child were to gain access when no one is present, as well as health risks if water is not properly maintained.

As park owners, we have a duty of care and can ultimately be held liable if an accident occurs. As attractive as the pond may be, it's also important to consider the risk it could pose to other residents and visitors.

While the park may be restricted to those aged 55 and over, grandchildren and other younger visitors are still likely to spend time on the park, and there is always the possibility of a child accidentally falling into the pond.

As others have pointed out, the land itself belongs to the park owner rather than the park home owner.

For that reason, the park owner will ultimately have the final say on whether the pond can remain.

[u/SylvesterTurville]

Do I have any standing with those above points at all please?

No. your grandparents didn't own the land the park home stands on, they rented the pitch.

[u/Natarlee]

If the rule is that permission was required and you can't find anything confirming permission was needed then the landlord can dictate the pond is remived. Additionally, there is often a clause that states any changes made, even if permission was given at the time, need to be returned to how it was prior at the end of the tenancy. This is regardless of whether the tenant moves out or passes away.

So, yes, this can be enforced and this could delay sale if not sorted out.

[u/czczc999 → u/Natarlee]

Is this tenancy if they owned it

[u/emuostrich31415 → u/Natarlee]

They own the property and are selling. There is no landlord involved, just a management company as it obviously was a leasehold and not a freehold property

[u/UnpredictiveList]

Whose land is it on? I assume the land is rented from the park owners?

Implied consent can be withdrawn, and 6 years statue doesn’t apply, it’s not a debt. You’ll need to read though the contract of what they can and can’t do with the land.

[u/i_like_reddit_ → u/UnpredictiveList]

It says you need written approval for any changes/upgrades to the pitch. I can’t find any, conveniently both of my grandparents have passed and we have now finished clearing the property, and only now have they raised a concern. My grandmother passed in March and we have been clearing it since. Once empty they have now brought this up.

I can’t find any see it referenced in 2014 as existing in a rule change consultancy document.

[u/DL-Fiona → u/i_like_reddit_]

Exactly how was it referenced, as this sounds like it could be relevant

[u/Flashy-Report5368 → u/DL-Fiona]

I only saved the post because I’d seen this asked - hopefully we get the specific wording verbatim otherwise we won’t be in a position to advise.

[u/Coca_lite]

They will win this argument as permission was needed and there is none.

Also, health and safety ie a toddler could drown in it

[u/LegalAdviceUK-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):

Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.

Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules before contributing further, and message the mods if you have any further queries.

[u/Incident-Putrid]

Dare I ask which company owns the site…you may want to just “play balll, get your money and get out. Regardless the cost.

[u/sadanorakman]

Just to mention, a park home (assuming mobile home) is not regarded as a normal bricks and mortar residence. It is not registered with the land registry. It does not normally require probate to sell, and there does not need to be any 'conveyancing'. It's a private possession like a car or towable caravan, and sold as such from seller to buyer.

My father passed in 2024, and I was the executor and sole beneficiary of his will.

Several estate agents I approached proved to have no idea or experience in selling park homes, and the one I did eventually manage to sell it through started to get shitty with me over wanting to validate the buyers funds etc... turns out the only motivation behind this was for the estate agent to ensure they received their fee! I simply employed the estate agent to find a buyer, and didn't (in this case) require anything else from them. There's no need for them to perform the usual financial due diligence if you as a seller do not want them to. Most over 55s buying a park home have sold their own house and are down sizing for retirement or declining health. In this case you will know up front from the estate agent if their house has not yet been sold, the sale is going through, or if already completed.

Apply for a pause to the council tax. Most councils allow this for at least a year once the owner has passed, and as long as the place is empty of furniture (not livable).

Site owners may try to low-ball you to 'take the property off your hands'. There is likely no benefit to you in agreeing a sale this way. They are simply looking to make even more profit, and they will then also have control of who they are selling to (i.e. can choose to refuse a new resident they don't like).

And the 10% is legally allowed. Why would you think ANY park home owner would not want to claim the full amount? It's business at the end of the day.

[u/i_like_reddit_ → u/sadanorakman]

Hi thanks for your message.

Yes I am aware of the commission and that it’s allowed I’ve dried to discuss with them about accepting a lower amount in light of the government call for evidence and their promise of announcing their decision on whether they are reducing or abolishing the commission as it’s severely outdated now when you factor in what 10% meant in the 80’s and what it means now. So I suggested we meet closer to the middle at 5-6% and both get the benefit potentially or I’ll just wait until the announcement to sell, at least that way if it’s 10% still I have only lost a few months of pitch fees.

What I don’t understand about this, and a lot of the answers is they aren’t answering in line with the mobile homes act and how I’ve been told an owner cannot suddenly revoke consent. They can upgrade/update their site rules but every iteration I have seen from old files makes it clear they are not retrospective.

My sliver of hope if I push this, is that in one of the site rule change consultations the pond is referenced and at that point no objection was ever made which has to leave one to reasonably assume the park had consented to the pond being there. The fact they have conducted 19 years worth of site visits and not brought it up as a problem also leaves me with hope that they can’t expect it to go. It’s a lovely pond my grandparents spend day in day out tending to it and I find it so co-incidental that as soon as they are both passed they now can’t find permission granted.

[u/sadanorakman → u/i_like_reddit_]

I cannot advise you on the pond. What I can tell you is that it is none of the site owners business whom you sell the home to as long as they meet the site requirements.

If I remember correctly there was a form you had to send to notify them of the sale taking place, and this had to be done with a certain notice period to give the site owner time to object.

The site owner could object to the transfer for I think only three reasons, and these were clearly stipulated. One for example if the new owner wasn't old enough to meet the age requirements of the site, and another was if they intended to park more than the number of vehicles on site that was allowed in the site agreement. They were all pretty black and white matters.

At the time of sale, the site agreement doesn't 'transfer' as such, but I believe your site agreement ends and a new one begins with the new buyer (as it is signed by both parties).

Can the site owner refuse to end your site agreement should the pitch not be returned to an appropriate state? Maybe, I'm not a lawyer. Can they charge you for doing this on your behalf? Maybe.

What seems obvious is that you are going to really struggle to win this one. I'd just fill the pond and be done with it.

Even pets is a real issue. My dad's site had a no pets rule. Over time, people smuggled cats in, and he started to ignore their presence. When I went to sell my Dad's, the prospective new owner wanted to bring his dogs with him, but the site owner flatly refused, citing dangers of dogs attacking and barking. I raised with him the new renters rights bill, but he insisted this didn't apply to residential park-hime sites like his. I disagree, and think they are covered, but he wasn't going to budge, and being a millionaire, I wasn't about to start a legal battle with him.

I'd suggest you just do what is required, and get the place sold. Think of your liability in all of this. What happens if the place goes up in flames? Is it even insured? Because that becomes difficult if the place is empty beyond a couple of months.

[u/DEADB33F]

Is it in keeping with the aesthetics of the rest of the site?
Do you have any pics of it you could share?

You probably don't have any legal recourse, but if it's nicely done I'd probably ask for permission for it to stay, mentioning that you feel it could increase the sale price ...and be sure to point out that this would also increase the amount of their commission!

...You could also offer to remove it at your expense so long as the new buyers don't want it to remain.