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!
is it normal contract is still not exchanged near completion date
Comments
-
Look at the Land Registry Title.Interesting, any particular reason why this is? Just seems a bit backwards to me as a layman why a buyer would agree to buy land (with a house on it) rather than the house itself as a complete and undamaged structure!
Note that it records ownership of the land (in fact the clue is in the name: Land Registry), and whilst the Plan of the Title may show an outline of the property within the land, that has no legal force and may be hugely out-of-date/inaccurate.0 -
Ok I get that but it still doesn't really address my question. Why would a buyer not want to include the material characteristics of the house structure (i.e. an undamaged building) as a condition of the contract? Can't think of any other contacts like this.0
-
Ok I get that but it still doesn't really address my question. Why would a buyer not want to include the material characteristics of the house structure (i.e. an undamaged building) as a condition of the contract? Can't think of any other contacts like this.
All houses have defects, big or small. The seller would be daft to promise you an undamaged house.0 -
No, you'd expect to buy it with the defects already existing at the point of exchange. But if it then suffers material damage, I would have thought it makes more sense for the buyer and seller to reassess whether they want to go ahead with the deal (which is what normally happens in Scotland).All houses have defects, big or small. The seller would be daft to promise you an undamaged house.
In practice how would completion happen anyway - a mortgage lender is hardly likely to hand over the money if they've been told about the problem (and I presume at the very least their solicitor would be telling them). How long would an insurance claim take to sort out?0 -
nkkingston wrote: »Freehold: you buy the land and anything that's on it.
Leasehold: you but the house but not the land it's on
Not really - given that you can buy airspace, and lease land. More like:
Freehold: you buy what is described in the title deeds
Leasehold: you rent what is described in the title deeds.0 -
cidfenmaria wrote: »Today is the completion date
Just got told by my solicitor that they are still waiting redemption figure on the other end, and hopefully receive today, lender has transferred the mortgage fund and I am liable to pay £36 to return it if it's not completed today or Monday.
by the way how long does that redemption figure thing take normally, how likely would it get sorted?
stress
I can't answer your question, but maybe one of the other posters can, once they've finished discussing whether a person is buying the land or the building on it.
BTW, have you actually exchanged yet?0 -
-
You could say the same thing about a car, but if you agree to buy it on Wednesday week and it catches fire the day before you're still not forced to buy the ashes!
But you are buying the land, not the house so it isn't the same. If you buy the land with a new car on it. If the car burns down or is driven away by its real owner, you still have to buy the land.Anything I say in no way constitutes financial advice and anything you do is your own decision.0 -
Really? I don't know about you but when I buy a house I want the full house and the land not just the land and what ever else is on it.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 245.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards