House sold & Land not registered to new buyer

Wilsden5

Hi, Newbie here, advise needed!
We bought a house in 2009, we were aware throughout the process that there were 2 plots, one with the house and garden on it and one small rectangle of land next to it which the seller had purchased from the Diocese some time earlier for approximately £2000.
I remember being shown the 2 plots on a map in our solicitor's office and signing or putting my initials on the maps to prove we had been shown the areas.
We sold this house last May and have now received a letter from the solicitor's firm who represented us (and our buyers) saying that the smaller piece of land is still in the name of the lady we bought the house from in 2009. The Land Registry title never changed to us when we bought it and has not been re registered to our buyer either.
They asked me if I could get in touch with the lady who we bought the house from and ask her to confirm that it was included in the sale when we bought it and should therefore now be registered to our buyers. After a bit of digging I got hold of her and wrote the letter I was asked to write. She rang me yesterday saying she was mortified over the whole thing and sent me a letter immedately via email confirming that the land should now belong to our buyers. I forwarded this to the solicitor (under the impression this would clear things up.) and he simply replied; "She needs to contact her Solicitors and instruct them to deal with the Transfer over. It will incur additional costs." Not very helpful in my opinion.
What I need to know is;
Which solicitor is supposed to register the land? The buyer or the seller? If it was our solicitor's responsibility as the buyer it could be an issue as the solicitor who represented us when we bought the property is no longer practising. (struck off!)
Can we just fill in a TR1? I looked on Gov.uk and it seems to me that this form allows someone to transfer a title to another person without incurring costs. We could even include all of our letters agreeing that the land now belongs to the current owner or am I being totally niave??
Either way I don't think it's fair that any of us should incur extra costs to get this land registered to the right person when all 3 parteis have paid conveyancers/solicitors to do this as part of our purchases.
Your thoughts much appreciated

G_M

Wilsden5 wrote: »

We bought a house in 2009, we were aware throughout the process that there were 2 plots, one with the house and garden on it and one small rectangle of land next to it which the seller had purchased from the Diocese some time earlier for approximately £2000.

We sold this house last May and have now received a letter from the solicitor's firm who represented us (and our buyers) saying that the smaller piece of land is still in the name of the lady we bought the house from in 2009. The Land Registry title never changed to us when we bought it
How come neither your solicitor, nor your buyer's, nor you, spotted this before you sold!!? More incompetance! (see below)

... She ....sent me a letter immedately via email confirming that the land should now belong to our buyers. I forwarded this to the solicitor (under the impression this would clear things up.) and he simply replied; "She needs to contact her Solicitors and instruct them to deal with the Transfer over. It will incur additional costs." Not very helpful in my opinion.
Correct advice. Very helpful. (though of course either you or your buyer would be wise to offer to pay her costs. Why should she?)

What I need to know is;
Which solicitor is supposed to register the land? The buyer or the seller?
The buyer
If it was our solicitor's responsibility as the buyer it could be an issue as the solicitor who represented us when we bought the property is no longer practising. (struck off!)
Now you know why - incompetance! Did you never check that the land had been registered to you though? Why not?

Can we just fill in a TR1?
I imagine so. Get original seller to sign.
You'll also need forms AP1 & ID1.
Check SDLT - you'll need to pay. Bear in mind it was a 'linked sale' so the value of both transfers are the relevant value.

I looked on Gov.uk and it seems to me that this form allows someone to transfer a title to another person without incurring costs.
See above.
Plus Land Registry fee.
We could even include all of our letters agreeing that the land now belongs to the current owner or am I being totally niave??
Yes.

Either way I don't think it's fair that any of us should incur extra costs to get this land registered to the right person when all 3 parteis have paid conveyancers/solicitors to do this as part of our purchases.
Your thoughts much appreciated

Yes - unfair. But I suggest you get your solicitor to do this. It eill cost you extra, but it will save your sale from collapsing.

Wilsden5

Hi Thanks for your reply.

We have already sold the house on so there is no threat of sales falling through but they have obviously checked the land registry and noticed the error.
(We never checked the land was regisited to us as we assumed our solicitor had done the job they were paid to do - Dont rub it in, First Time Buyer's naivety again I guess!)
I am not the type of person to use ignorance as an excuse so as I was the buyer I accept if it was my solicitor's responsibility to register the Land in my name, then with the onwards sale, it was my buyer's solicitor's responsibility to register it in theirs.

G_M

So errors were made by

* your solicitor when you bought. He did not register the land in your name
* You when you bought.You did not check a) what you were buying and b) that it was then registered to you
* you when you sold. You did not check what you were selling. Your solicitor I imagine simply sold what you own (registered) and sent you copies to check/agree (which you presumably did)
* your buyer's solicitor when you sold. He should have ensured that his client was getting what he expected
* your buyer. He did not check what he was buying

A catalogue of errors by all.

On reflection, I think the prime errors lie with:

* your original solicitor (now struck off)
* you personally and your buyer personally. Both should have checked that the Land Registry Plan of the Title corresponded to the physical land being bought/sold.

Your respective solicitors would have simply transferred the Title as instructed. Not knowing the property personally (did they do a site visit??!!!) how could they know a piece of garden was not on the Title they were transferring?

They would of course have sent the Plans to their clients (you and your buyer) to check............

davidmcn

Do the contracts say that (a) your purchase was meant to include the land in question and/or (b) you were meant to sell it to your buyer? If the contracts have also omitted the extra land then it's possibly for your buyer to sort out directly with the current owner.

Wilsden5

Everyone involved was aware that there were two plots of land forming each sale, one with the house and garden on, and another patch adjacent to it (which the seller I bought from had purchased to make the garden area bigger.)
The lady I bought the house and land from has infomred me (in writing) it was impossible to put both plots on the same title when she purchased it.

G_M

Wilsden5 wrote: »

Everyone involved was aware that there were two plots of land .

So you know for sure that your solicitor when you sold was aware there were TWO Titles being sold?

You know for sure that your buyer was aware there were TWO Titles being bought?

You know for sure that your buyer's solicitor was aware there were TWO Titles being bought?

Wilsden5

As I said, I remember being in my solicitors office and being shown two maps with two plots of land highlighted in red. I have no idea what went on in my buyer's solicitor's office but we told them the garden had once been two plots of land.

When we viewed the property in 2009, the owner pointed out that the far side of the garden had belonged to the school but was overgrown and unused so she had bought it.
We also pointed out to our buyers during a viewing that the far side had once been a seperate bit of land.
It is approx 6 meters long by 2 meters wide.

Not exactly sure what difference this makes :embarasse

tea-bag

Why are you bothered? It is not your house anymore.

Walk away.....

TBagpuss

well, if OP represented the sale as being of both pieces of land then they have to give good title to both pieces of land.

Step One: Speak to your solicitor and clarify whether your agreement with the buyer was for both pieces of land. If it was, then you are responsible for getting it transferred across. Your buyers will be responsible for the actual registration, but could look to you to cover any difference in the costs involved between what it would have cost were it being transferred from you t them with the rest of the house, and the actual cost now a 3rd person is involved. If your solicitor was made aware that there were two pieces of land then they ought to have checked the title to both and you may have a complaint against them. However, I suspect that, as G_M says, your solicitor may have simply delat with the property in your name, and almost certianly sent you plans at some point to confirm that this was correct. If they did, and you did, then they are not at fault.

If you explicitly told them that there was two separate pieces of land, and they did not send you plans to check, then they may be at fault.

Your original solicitors, who apparently did know that there were two separate pieces of land seem to have been at fault - even though the solicitor in question has since been struck off them you may have grounds for a complain (and to claim any additional costs ) from the firm you used, if they are still in business, or from their insurers at the time of your purchase.

If the extra land was not part of the formal agreements or contracts between you and your buyers then you **may** be able to 'walk away' and leave the new owners to deal directly with the current owner.

The additional costs may not be very great and I suggest that you ask your solicitor what these are likely to be, and then decide whether it is worth the hassle of tying to decide who is to blame. Be aware that you original seller may incur costs as (unless she is close enough to a Land Registry Office to get it done there) she will probably have to pay to get anyone to complete the ID1 for her.

G_M

Wilsden5 wrote: »

When we viewed the property in 2009, the owner pointed out that the far side of the garden had belonged to the school but was overgrown and unused so she had bought it.
If told this most buyers would assume the ex-school land now belonged to the owner and would be included in the owner's property Title. They would not immediately assume there was an extra Title.

However, I (and any wise buyer) would check.
We also pointed out to our buyers during a viewing that the far side had once been a seperate bit of land.
As above. They assumed you were just explaining history, not that you were saying there were 2 Titles.

But they should have double-checked.

It is approx 6 meters long by 2 meters wide.

Not exactly sure what difference this makes :embarasse

I remember being in my solicitors office and being shown two maps with two plots of land highlighted in red. I have no idea what went on in my buyer's solicitor's office but we told them the garden had once been two plots of land.

Again, did you explain it was 2 Titles, or did the solicitor assume the extra land had been added to the existing Title. (though he should have checked - & the 'two Plans' implies he had 2 Title details, uness, of course, the 2nd Plan was, say, a developer's plan rather than a Land Registry Plan.




How many TR1s did you sign? (the document that formally transfers Title from seller to buyer)?
One? Did you not think that strange......?