Shared freeholder does not live in the address on the freehold

jbainbridge

As GM says, start communicating using posted letters (using stamps). I'd be surprised if the niece throws out the post!?

Land_Registry

Mr_8o8 wrote: »

Oh yes! We had done that. The Land Registry (for a fee) told us that they were living in.... the flat below still!

They did also tell us who their mortgage was held tho. So we wrote to them but unfortunately we didn't hear anything back. I may dig this letter out again and try again.

The contact details provided by a registered owner are supplied in order for us to be able to contact them should we need to as part of the registration process.

Nowadays they can also provide an email, care of or overseas address if they wish to but it remains their responsibility to ensure the contact details are up to date/accurate enough for them to receive any communications from us.

There is no obligation for them to 'live there' and if they supply details which ultimately mean they do not receive such contacts from us then they are putting themselves at risk in much the same way as they are doing with regards their obligations as a joint freeholder.

It is not unusual for the individual flat owners/leaseholders to then be a combined group of freeholders in this way although, as posted often they have formed a company to make things easier, especially when the leasehold is sold on and the share in the freehold also needs to be transferred as is now happening here.

You have already explored the contact issue with the person living there so any communication addressed to the freehold owner in that capacity is the way to go. If the tenant/niece does not pass it on then that is an issue for her and her landlord/leasehold owner.

If the leasehold is mortgaged then the lender may be willing to pass items on but they don't have to.

The third option is to check who has acted for the owner previously on any dealings with the property. From a registration perspective that may be several years previously but a starting point perhaps as many people retain the same solicitor.

If one of the other leaseholders/freeholders is now selling then they will need to get hold of the missing owner in order to complete the transfer of the freehold title. If they don't and the buyer does not cover off the freehold ownership then this is likely to become a problem in the future for each of you - if you do trace them it might be prudent to consider switching the freehold ownership to a company as posted

piggeh

When I was purchasing a flat recently, I looked up details on the land registry and then searched for the people on the electoral roll to see where they are currently living.

Mr_8o8

Thanks for your replies, they've been very helpful. I need to speak to the person who is selling's solicitor to confirm who I am so I will ask them a few questions and see what they've found.

If it's easy to set up the freehold as a company I may do this to save myself and others trouble, in the long run.

Guest101

Mr_8o8 wrote: »

Sorry, I don't think that part is illegal, that is an annoyance as I can't contact them if anything goes wrong. It also seems to be holding up another one of the freeholders sale, i don't want to be in their shoes in 3 years or 4 years time.

What I mean by not being legitimate was it seems as tho owner is a landlord and trying their best not to tell anyone.

But he or she doesnt have to tell you anything?

Now HMRC, their Lender, the Council (sometimes) must be told, but not the neighbours.

It could just be empty, you'd have even less luck contacting the owner than, atleast there's a go between who has reasonable contact with the owner.