Chancel Liability... wtf?

Haggisman

Haggisman

Haggisman

Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2004
Posts
19,021
Location
Birmingham
Had a letter from the solicitor handling our conveyancing this morning. Apparently the property we're in the process of buying is potentially liable for chancel repair costs - will cost us £150 to find out for sure, or £45 for 25 years insurance. Now obviously the insurance is a no brainer, but honestly, what the hell gives the church the right to demand payments from people who have absolutely no affiliation with them, and in fact vehemently disagree with their unethical practices.

I was previously happy to leave religion to it's own devices, thinking it similar to the eccentric but essentially harmless loony uncle that everyone has, but it's becoming evident that there's a far more malevolent side to it. Dirty thieving scum!

Tempted to use the argument that it's illegal to provide money to criminal organisations (e.g. paedophile rings), but can't help but think it's probably not worth the effort!

Just a rant really, but has anyone else experienced this, and how do they feel about it/how did you deal with it?
 
As far as I know , I think most chancel liabilities cover an area where the liability is joint and several, i.e. they can go after everyone or an individual. Sometimes if it's a deprived area the parishes will just go after the wealthier residents or if its a very mixed bag they tend to go after everyone to spread the cost.
 
We bought it when we moved in December and went for the shortest term possible, because in October '13 I believe that any properties still not registered by the local chancel authority thing are not valid. So we'll check in October and depending on whether or not we've been lined up for a future bum loving, will either renew or cease.

The law is archaic and ridiculous. But that's religion for you.
 
Church of England really need the money though, it must be big relief for them not having to pay any taxes on their £5.2Billion worth of assets.
 
Robbie G said:
We bought it when we moved in December and went for the shortest term possible, because in October '13 I believe that any properties still not registered by the local chancel authority thing are not valid. So we'll check in October and depending on whether or not we've been lined up for a future bum loving, will either renew or cease.

The law is archaic and ridiculous. But that's religion for you.
Click to expand...

Although, from what I can tell, in October when you find out for definite either way, it'll either be a case of being in the clear, or being liable - at which point you will not be able to re-insure the property, potentially making your house unsaleable.

I absolutely detest religion. :mad:
 
Burnsy2023 said:
This whole thing isn't really about religion though. It's about old landlord contracts.
Click to expand...

Don't bring facts into a GD anti-religion rant Burnsy! You'll kill off fully 1/3rd of the threads on here at a stroke if you do that :)
 
Burnsy2023 said:
This whole thing isn't really about religion though. It's about old landlord contracts.
Click to expand...

The point is that there should be no direct relationship between a homeowner and the church. Homeowners pay domestic council rates already; that is where their legal obligation should end. Any cost of maintaining church assets should be entirely between the council and the church and any well-wishing donors.

If it weren't for religion, then this is exactly what the situation would be. So yes, it's about religion. Old landlord contracts are the result not the reason.

Haggisman, that's not right. You'll still be able to insure against it like anything else. Just because your property may have been registered, there'll still be people lining up to take our money to indemnify us against the low risk of a large chancel repair bill.


**** the church.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom