Missing deeds indemnity - unreasonable?

AllanJ89

Hi all,

Would really appreciate some advice navigating a tricky conveyancing issue.

Our buyers' solicitors are asking us to pay for two indemnity policies, one relating to a missing deed relating from 1963, which refers an agreement between the (no longer existant) gas board and Ministry of Health. (We live in a flat built on an old hospital site, and 1963 was when the hospital was extended, I believe).

The second missing deed is from 1870.

Is it reasonable to go back to our buyers and say we won't bear the (nearly £300 cost) of these two policies and admin charges? I don't want to jeopardise our sale, but the odds of a defunct gas board, or someone's ancestor from a deal a century and a half ago are likely to spring up and sue the buyers, surely?

We've not really run into this sort of issue with our conveyancing yet, but money is tight generally and this feels really unfair!

G_M

If you do not have Deeds which relate to the Title of the property you own, then it is perfectly fair for a buyer to expect you to bear the costs resulting from this.

why don't you have the documents?

davidmcn

AllanJ89 wrote: »

the odds of a defunct gas board, or someone's ancestor from a deal a century and a half ago are likely to spring up and sue the buyers, surely?

Yes, the odds are low, which is why insurance against the risk of it happening is relatively cheap.

We've not really run into this sort of issue with our conveyancing yet, but money is tight generally and this feels really unfair!

It's fairer than your buyer meeting a cost incurred by you (or your predecessors) losing your title deeds.

AdrianC

You can refuse to pay if you wish, as the risk is very low of your documentation failings ever causing an issue, but G_M's point is very valid. Why did your own solicitor not pick up on this when you bought?



Just because "the gas board" is defunct does not mean their assets did not transfer to a very extant successor company. Any rights over your property are just as tangible an asset as the gas pipes feeding it - and you wouldn't argue that they're unowned because the gas company has changed...