We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Insolvency Act Indemnity
MJL81
Posts: 9 Forumite
I'm purchasing a property, and have been told at the last possible moment that I require Insolvency Act Indemnity to protect my lender because the owner gave the house as a gift to the vendor (elderly mother to son). The draft policy states lists the lender, new owner, subsequent owners, title owners the benefit of cover. However the conveyancers notes clearly state, it's only for the lender and that I have no protection. So if the previous owner files for bankruptcy, the house as a below value gift can be claimed back. My lender gets an insurance payout, and I'm in the street?? This seems crazy, am I misunderstanding something or being taken for a ride. I thought this type of insurance was to protect a purchasers use of a deposit that was obtained as a gift from a friend/relative?
I now reckon the informational notes saying 'not covered' are aimed at the expected person taking out the insurance, the vendor!! As background, the vendor refused to pay the insurance that protects my lender against the owners benefit in law - the insolvency act - the vendor gets a gift, a benefit to them. But I'm left holding the bill...
I now reckon the informational notes saying 'not covered' are aimed at the expected person taking out the insurance, the vendor!! As background, the vendor refused to pay the insurance that protects my lender against the owners benefit in law - the insolvency act - the vendor gets a gift, a benefit to them. But I'm left holding the bill...
25k '04 to 25k '11
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards