UK couple must pay huge church bill

This has been rumbling on for ages. And it's hard not to feel that there is something not good about the situation where buying a property incurs a liability for repairing an old building nearby. So we feel sympathy because we wouldn't like to buy something and discover a rather nasty hidden cost. However, we should recall that this is not the case here.

Mr Wallbank said they were caught in a vicious circle because no one would buy the farm with the church repair liability attached to it. But to get rid of the liability they would have to pay money up front for repair costs that might arise in the distant future.

Should the church waive its right to repair moneys? In theory, perhaps. And yet in English law, as I understand it, most parish churches are actually owned by the community at large. Feel sorry also for congregations who are saddled with the upkeep of ancient monuments in which they, the living churches, happen to worship. In many cases they would be somewhat happy to leave the building to the community and focus on the things that they consider to be the truly gospel usages of time and money. Yet they feel an obligation to the community. So little wonder that a local church in this story should want to see the law clarified. At least that was the position I seem to recall from a couple of years ago. I just wish that the report included the other things the vicar said.

UK couple must pay $393.000 church bill: Filed in: church, buildings, money