Charge on property further up the chain

DRP

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

Thrugelmir and <sebb> give good advice and as they suggest without the full facts it is very difficult to add anything to the thread.

The key from a registration perspective is knowing how the charge is actually protected on the register - if it is registered as a legal charge then as you suggest the lender is the one who would release it

If it is registered as a restriction for example and in favour of a third party then other requirements exist.

Either way though it would appear from what you have posted that the business aspects remain in play in some way

Sorry to butt in on this thread, but a quick question about the Charges Register.

Does any charge listed on Charges Register have to be resolved/removed before the house can be sold?

Have just downloaded the Land Registry documents for a house we are offering on and they list:

C: Charges Register
This register contains any charges and other matters
that affect the land.
1 A Transfer of the land in this title dated dd mm 1978 made between (1) Builders Co. and (2) Mr & Mrs XXXX contains restrictive covenants.
NOTE: Original filed.
2 (dd.mm.2010) REGISTERED CHARGE dated dd.mm 2010.
3 (dd.mm.2010) Proprietor: LLOYDS BANK PLC
End of register

As I understand it the house was bought by the present owner in 2004 so addition to the register have occurred during his ownership.

Land_Registry

The charge yu refer to is a registered charge and as such secured against the property.

Whilst in theory the charge can remain any new buyer is likely to have their own legal charge (mortgage) to secure so their new lender would want the old one removed. One of the conditions of lending against the property would be to have such a charge removed.

Removal happens through redemption i.e. paid off and then discharged.

DRP

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

The charge yu refer to is a registered charge and as such secured against the property.

Whilst in theory the charge can remain any new buyer is likely to have their own legal charge (mortgage) to secure so their new lender would want the old one removed. One of the conditions of lending against the property would be to have such a charge removed.

Removal happens through redemption i.e. paid off and then discharged.

Thanks very much for that - could the charge as written be related to some kind of arrangement made during divorce settlements ?

Land_Registry

A registered charge is normally associated to a loan secured against the property and can, I assume, arise for a variety of reasons.

If one party needed to borrow money to settle a debt of some sort and had to secure it against the property in order to get the money then that is quite feasible.

Another reason why a charge with a later date appears is that people remortgage after 2, 3 or 5 year fixed terms as well, so matching the charge date with the purchase date is not proof positive of the reasons behind it.

DRP

Thanks very much for your help.

dj.boz

If you are buying a house with a mortgage then whoever is lending you the money will not let you purchase with a charge remaining on the property.

Currently 24 weeks in and still awaiting for charges to be removed. We are at the final stage, but we have been here for 10 weeks and unfortunately time is running out. We too have not seen anything else out there that is suitable / meets our requirements.

If you still wish to proceed then just be prepared for lots of headaches and going back a few steps!

zzzLazyDaisy

wheldcj wrote: »

Our estate agent was clear in saying that the seller had paid his charge.

The estate agent is not YOUR estate agent, he acts for the seller. It is not his job to advise you - that's your solicitor's job - and he owes no duty of care to you. The estate agent's primary focus is to ensure that the sale goes through. In any event, he only knows what the seller is telling him (or possibly what the flat owner's estate agent is telling him). Either way he is unlikely to have all the facts.

The solicitors on the other hand can and do speak to each other. If you don't trust your solicitor to act properly on your behalf, change solicitors as this is likely to be long winded. But it may be taken out of your hands - if I was your seller I would be withdrawing from the purchase of the flat and looking for another property.

wheldcj

The flat owner seems now to have a total disregard for the chain, he seems to be a plonker (being as kind as I can) and I think the enivitabilty is that our vendors will decide to pull out of the purchase and probably the whole chain.

My general question is, if it could be proven that the flat owner knew of the charge and that there was no chance this would be removed in time to exchange would there be a case for negligent misrepresnation to recoup our out of pocket expenses?

Or would this not be a possibility because because he is further up the chain or because using the misreprensation act is not a option full stop in house purchases?

zzzLazyDaisy

The people higher up the chain have hit a problem that may cause the chain to collapse. While annoying and frustrating, it happens. Assuming you are in England or Wales, you cannot claim off anyone for your out of pocket expenses, simple because legally either party can withdraw from the transaction at any point up to exchange, and in that case both parties are responsible for their costs incurred to date.

Thrugelmir

wheldcj wrote: »

My general question is, if it could be proven that the flat owner knew of the charge and that there was no chance this would be removed in time to exchange would there be a case for negligent misrepresnation to recoup our out of pocket expenses?

How would you obtain the evidence? There's no contractual obligation between you and them regarding an exchange date either.