Illegal construction without minimum distance to neighboring property

Hello everyone!

After our neighboring house was rented out for 10 years, the owner decided to sell it to new owners. Since they had the property remeasured, it turned out that almost half of all the buildings are illegal constructions. ops:

We are specifically affected by an extension to the house, which has a boundary distance of only 2.30m to our property. We didn’t even notice the extension ourselves because the hedge had grown so tall and our house is quite far away. When the hedge was removed during the sale, it didn’t bother us (no window on our side), as we hadn’t signed anything and didn’t know whether the house would be demolished.

Now the seller has been showing up since January with a building permit that we are supposed to sign. They say it’s just formalities. No further info, it’s only a conservatory ?! Upon closer inspection of the documents, we saw the small boundary distance and returned the application unsigned.

Since then, the seller has been trying to come over with his architect (which we don’t want, because we know which side he’s on) to convince us otherwise. Otherwise, he threatens demolition of the extension by 70 cm and a fine from the district office. Furthermore, I would not give up any rights but only "release" the district office from initiating actions.

I have now surfed the internet a bit and discovered that if I sign, I have to increase my boundary distance if I want to build up to the boundary myself. From 3m to 3.70m. I find that quite a lot, and besides, that would depreciate my property, wouldn’t it?! Also, an entry in the land register as a building encumbrance. Doesn’t sound very attractive...

Amidst all this confusion, I stumble over the terms "conservatory" and "release." It is a completely normal extension with a double window. No trace of glass surfaces or glass roof. There is also the "insulated deviation / release," but unfortunately I can’t make much sense of the official jargon. Are both buzzwords a "loophole" to get the permit more easily?

We don’t want to have a dispute with our neighbors, but we also don’t want to take the blame for the illegal construction that the seller knowingly allowed. Once he has collected the money in full, he’ll be gone without a trace and we’ll have to live with the consequences.

I would be happy if some expert opinions come in to clarify some things. Thank you very much!

Best regards

Pragmatic: Does the cultivation bother you? Apparently not. So just sign. BUT: I would only do it with the new owner.

The thing with the 3 70 m is correct.

If you plan something there in the future, it is effectively a restriction.
If you have not planned anything there, it is still a devaluation. Maybe you can find a suitable compensation, e.g. a new fence / hedge at his expense only?

Make sure that he also bears the costs for the fees that are officially incurred.

The designation of the room usage as a conservatory here probably serves merely to appease you, to attribute a bit of the cuteness of a little puppy to the extension in your eyes. In fact, whether as a glasshouse or brick-built, it is a non-border-privileged space – that is, one that must maintain setback distances. This is nothing other than trying to deceitfully take advantage of your stupidity, trusting that you help the previous owner of your neighbor’s house to mitigate the deserved consequences of his legal violations. And yes, unfortunately, you have disappointed his trust in your stupidity and have quite correctly discovered that he also shamelessly wants to sneak a significant disadvantage into the deal, namely the value-reducing takeover of setback areas. I believe there is no co-plaintiff in building regulations law, otherwise I would be highly tempted, in your place, to take that position.

This has nothing to do with the new owner of the neighboring house; avoiding the consequences for him is a shoe you should not try to wear. Girls tend to be kind in case of doubt, but here, in my opinion, that would be equivalent to being foolish. It is solely the buyer’s responsibility to thoroughly check what he is buying before the purchase, not yours. For good reason, this must be done at the notary’s office instead of at Günni’s train station pub. If he paid money for the "value" of illegal constructions instead of having compensated for their demolition risk, that was a stupidity that you do not have to make your own afterward out of kindness. It is best to let the guys settle this among themselves; let the buyer sue the seller for this brazen ripoff. From my point of view, if the property with the illegal buildings was sold as supposedly compliant buildings standing there, the notary also messed up in some way and morally should be "held up against the wall." Be nice on other occasions if you really want to be – here it is out of place. You do not need to "pardon" your neighbor’s illegal buildings.

The "isolated exemption" in German will mean that the building can be exempted from a single building regulation – for example, a height restriction. Because the mere fact that it must keep a 3 m distance from the boundary is only a minimum value that can be higher depending on the building height. Or, for example, a window – even one facing "backwards" – may not be far enough away from the boundary. In any case, someone wants to sneak a large package of brazen insults to your intelligence to you, wrapped up in a cute way.

Yep, you would then be at a disadvantage. Can you build something at the 3.70 meter distance or do you want to?

Otherwise, in return, allow boundary construction at his expense.

Basically unpleasant, I wouldn’t accuse the former owner of anything, maybe he didn’t know either. If the relationship was good, and it doesn’t disadvantage you, then sign.

The designation of the room use as a conservatory here probably serves merely your appeasement, to lend the extension in your eyes a bit of the cuteness of a little dog. In fact, whether as a greenhouse or built of masonry, it is a non-border-privileged room – that is, one that must keep distance areas clear. This is nothing other than trying to sneak by relying on your stupidity, helping the previous owner of your neighbor's house to mitigate the deserved consequences of his legal violations. And yes, unfortunately, you have disappointed his trust in your stupidity and quite correctly found out that he also brazenly wants to shove a full-fledged disadvantage into your nest, namely the value-reducing assumption of distance areas. I believe there is no secondary plaintiff in building regulations law, otherwise, in your place, I would be extremely eager to take that position.

This has nothing to do with the new owner of the neighboring house; avoiding the consequences for him is a shoe you should not try on. Girls tend to be rather kind in case of doubt, but here, in my opinion, that would be tantamount to being stupid. The house buyer is solely responsible for thoroughly checking what he is buying before the purchase, not you. For good reason, this has to be done at the notary's office instead of Günni’s train station pub. If he paid money for the "value" of illegal buildings instead of having their demolition risk compensated, that was stupidity, which you need not kindly also turn into your own afterward. It's best to let the guys settle that among themselves; let the buyer sue the seller for this brazen rip-off. From my point of view – if the property with the illegal buildings was sold as supposedly properly standing buildings – the notary also messed up in some way and morally "should be put up against the wall." Be sweet on other occasions if you absolutely want to be – here it is out of place. You do not need to "pardon" your neighbor's illegal buildings.

The "isolated exemption" in German will mean that the building can be exempted from an individual construction regulation – for example, a height limit. Because the mere fact that it must keep 3 m distance from the boundary is only a minimum value, which can also be higher depending on the building height. Or, for example, a window – even looking "backwards" – may not be far enough from the boundary. In any case, someone wants to peddle you a large package of brazen insults to your intelligence disguised as something cute.

You probably can't say it any better.