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!
Vendors, not buyer, want to exchange with tenant in situ
Comments
-
-
This is not correct, a solicitor has to obey the law and their professional standards otherwise they leave themselves open to rebuke or prosecution.Thrugelmir wrote: »Their solicitor acts on their instructions. Whatever they might be.
(If you were buying the property to let. You could agree for the tenants to remain).
A solicitor will not draw money from a bank fraudulently if they know the transaction conditions are false, in this case vacant possession is not being granted. The solicitor will tell their client to find a new firm, the consequences for them should the bank find out can be draconian. It would make them party to mortgage fraud if the mortgage is owner occupier.0 -
We had a very similar situation. Our solicitor and mortgage provider assured us it would be fine - if anything went wrong, it would be down to the vendor to sort out. Forum members thought we were crazy and some resorted to name calling lol...
We didn't have any problems whatsoever.0 -
I am glad everything worked out for you. However the risks the OP would be exposing themselves too are potentially ruinous because the vendor doesn't want a void period.We had a very similar situation. Our solicitor and mortgage provider assured us it would be fine - if anything went wrong, it would be down to the vendor to sort out. Forum members thought we were crazy and some resorted to name calling lol...
We didn't have any problems whatsoever.
The vendor needs to make up their mind, wither they are renting the property or they are selling it. Any solicitor that goes along with the vendors wishes is a bad solicitor.0 -
Reading between the lines here I reckon the vendor cannot afford their mortgage without the rental-income and also cannot afford the costs of formal repossession either. Consequently it will be a month of Sundays, or more likely, never, before the vendor will be able to offer vacant possession to the OP.
I'd be looking for another property to buy rather than wasting any more of my time and energy on this one.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353K Banking & Borrowing
- 254K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.8K Spending & Discounts
- 246.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 260K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards