The Fixtures versus Chattels Dilemma

Executive Summary 

The instant research paper delves into the manifest difference between chattels/personal property and fixtures from a conceptual and practical perspective. The conceptual definitions of chattels and fixtures make it easy to differentiate between the two classifications of objects more so when looked at from the general perspective with real property taking the meaning of land. The research paper then delves into the practical meaning of chattels and fixtures from the modern scenario where real estate means both the land and the house constructed therein. Based on the practical meaning, chattels and fixtures are no longer in black and white and some objects may be considered as chattels by some yet as fixtures by others. Bias based on benefit and profit further exacerbates the situation so that as the research paper reveals, moving to court will sometimes become necessary to determine what is a chattel and what is a fixture. In essence, there is no general rules or easy means to determine between fixtures and chattels and objects may need to be canvassed individually to make the determination. 

Introduction 

The traditional meaning of real property was limited to land but the same has been made into a moving target wit h the advent of permanent buildings. By definition, anything that is attached to the ground is considered as a fixture while anything that is on the land but can easily be moved out of the land is considered as a chattel (Fourie & Pienaar, 2017). This apparently simple definition becomes extremely complicated when buildings are being sold as the buyer and seller haggle on what should be considered as a fixture or chattel. The basis for the complication lies in the fact that fixtures must be left behind while chattels can be carried away by the vendor. In some cases, it is possible for the sum total of the value of all chattels to exceed that of the property itself by far thus exacerbating the dispute. The aforesaid dilemma pertaining to the difference between chattels and fixtures has thus informed many disputes between buyers and vendors of real estate and in extreme cases leading to court battles (Fourie & Pienaar, 2017). There is no the definitive definition that clearly differentiates between fixtures and chattels thus each case has to be considered based on its own merits as opposed to using gene ral rul es. 

General Rules on the Difference between Chattels and Fixtures 

The broadest definition of fixtures and chattels is that a fixture is anything that is permanently attached to the property while a chattel is anything that is not attached to the property. This meaning is easy enough to be definitive when the word property meant land . Today, real property means land and all erections therein, including buildings (Fourie & Pienaar, 2017). The building will come with several attachments in itself, which complicate the meaning of the chattels and fixtures. A second meaning of chattels and fixtures was developed to suit the new meaning relating to houses and other erections on a property. Under the new meaning, the definition of chattels and fixtures is based on the purpose and usage of the object and why it has been attached to the larger fixture (Thomas, 2015). For example, a doorknob is attached to the door so as to make the door easier to use, thus a doorknob becomes a fixture. On the other hand, a power generator is attached to the floor of the house to reduce its vibrations thus making the generator, not the floor, more useful which makes the generator a chattel and not a fixture. Based on the combination of the old and new rules, there are many grey areas relating to what amounts to a chattel and what amounts to a fixture (Fourie & Pienaar, 2017). For example, is a vendor obliged to leave diamond studded door knobs behind because they are fixtures , even if the diamonds alone are worth more than the entire house? 

Examples of Fixture and Chattels In my House 

The process of differentiating between fixtures and chattels in my house was ridden with dilemma with some items being considered as chattels and fixtures contemporaneously, based on perspective. The final list of fixtures included the inbuilt deep freezer, the fence in the backyard, the bathtub, the doorknobs, and the kitchen sink. The final list of chattels included the fridge, the swing set in the backyard, the electric oven, the entertainment system, and the aquarium. Some of the choices were relatively easy, a good example being considering the kitchen sink as a fixture and the entertainment system as a chattel. The kitchen sink was built at the same time that the entire house was built and it would be almost impossible to remove it without substantively altering the house. On the other hand, the entertainment system may have speakers that are screwed to the wall but its main component is easily movable around the house and is even e quipped with wheels. Screwing the speakers to the wall is just a method of improving the quality of the sound produced. Among the most complicated objects to determine were the fence and the swing set in the backyard, both of which have been dug into the soil. The fence has been erected to make the backyard private thus improving the backyard itself, hence it is a fixture. On the other hand, the swing set seemed to be a fixture at first until the purpose rule was applied. The only reason why the swing set is dug in is to stabilize it enough for usage hence it is a chattel. The same rules, which combine nature and purpose were used to identify the other listed items either as fixtures or chattels (Thomas, 2015). 

Issues that may arise between Renter and Landlord or Buyer and Seller 

The renter and seller on the one side and the landlord and buyer on the other would have a respective bias that would affect the definition and differences between chattels and fixtures. For example, a tenant who wants to move out and a seller who wants to release a house would insist that the swing as defined in the section above is a chattel and should not be left behind. On the other hand, landlord and buyer would argue that the swing is a fixture and should be left behind by the vacating renter or seller respectively. The renter and seller would argue that the swing is only attached to the ground for better usage while the landlord and buyer would argue that the presence of the swing improved the value of the backyard itself, making the swing a chattel (Thomas, 2015). If the value of the swing forms a substantive fraction of the value of the house, the dilemma about whether the swing is a chattel or fixture could end up in court. A similar scenario could apply to other objects which are attached to the property. 

Conclusion 

It is clear from the above that the difference between fixtures and chattels is easy and defective in theory but becomes complicated when applied to a practical situation. Even household objects that are easy to define become dilemmas when determining whether or not they amount to chattels or fixtures. Further, the dilemma is exacerbated by the manifest bias on the parties who stand to benefit if a valuable object is considered as a chattel or as a fixture depending on the situation. For example, a buyer would want almost everything in the house bought to be considered as a fixture and left behind. On the other hand, the seller would want as many things as possible to be considered as chattels so they can be chatted away. The only definitive solution is to determine whether objects are fixtures or chattels based on the merits and demerits of each case. 

References 

Fourie, M., & Pienaar, G. (2017). Tracing the roots of forfeiture and the loss of property in English and American law. Fundamina , 23 (1), 20-38. 

Thomas, S. (2015). Mortgages, fixtures, fittings and security over personal property. N. Ir. Legal Q. , 66 , 343-365