Solicitor submitted letter of noncompliance

Mtk

Hi. New to here.
We are trying to sell a house that my wife bought in 2007. She bought it from New and the solicitor at the time was working for both the developer and her.
Now we come to sell and we went with another solicitor. The bank sent the deeds and cert of compliance. It says the property is compliant other that needing planning permission for an attic extension.
This was first we knew of this as, as far as she knew she bought two story house.
Surely the solicitor should not have accepted this as a cert of compliance. Surely the bank should not have accepted this. Shouldn't the solicitor be responsible for misleading his client. Surely the contract is null and void or at least a problem that's between the bank and solicitor. Why should we be left holding the can for the actions of someone who was supposed to be advocating for her but in fact deceived her?
He has left us with an unsellable property. Other than applying for permission myself what can be done to to be left whole?

davidmcn

Mtk wrote: »

The bank sent the deeds and cert of compliance. It says the property is compliant other that needing planning permission for an attic extension.

I'm not sure what a "certificate of compliance" is in this context - can you explain what it is and who issued it?

Surely the bank should not have accepted this.

Were they told about it before completion? Was your wife?

Shouldn't the solicitor be responsible for misleading his client.

Well, yes, if your wife can demonstrate that she's suffered a loss due to her solicitor's negligence.

Surely the contract is null and void or at least a problem that's between the bank and solicitor.

Which contract? If the solicitor has misled the bank, that only becomes relevant if the bank make a loss i.e. after a repossession.

What does your wife's current solicitor advise?

G_M

I'm also struggling to understand.

Is the problem that the property has an attic but no Planning Permission for the attic?

If so, did the solicitor know there was an attic? How?

Also don't understand why the bank had the Deeds (or the certificate)? In 2007 the Title would have been registered with the Land Registry. Deeds would not have been held by the bank.

Please explain more clearly exactly what the issue is.


ps:

the solicitor at the time was working for both the developer and her.

Never a good idea!

Mtk

Ok so obviously my wife would never have bought a house that required planning permission and never knew that the engineers report had stated this.
The engineers cert of compliance which states this was attained by the solicitor and submitted to the bank as proof of compliance with planning and the bank accepted this and gave the mortgage.
My wife never saw this until the bank released the deeds and this cert when we wanted to sell.
The solicitor never registered or got folio numbers for any of the houses in the estate. Did it the old way apparently through the deeds place.
Bottom line should the solicitor have informed her of the situation before going ahead and submitting this to the bank as proof of planning compliance without her knowledge. He knew and didn't tell her.

Mtk

The solicitor got a cert of compliance from an engineer. On his planning compliance cert the engineer stated that planning was needed for the properties attic convention. Should he the solicitor not have informed my wife at this point?
Instead he never showed her this and continued as if there was planning and the bank released cash based on this. How can this be right.
Why does my wife have to honour this loan based on the fact her solicitor decieved her?

davidmcn

Mtk wrote: »

The engineers cert of compliance which states this was attained by the solicitor and submitted to the bank as proof of compliance with planning

It's not usual for there to be any certificate of compliance with planning, and I'm not sure why an engineer would be involved. Is this about a particular planning condition? What sort of engineer?

and the bank accepted this and gave the mortgage.

Are you sure you've got the timeline right?

The solicitor never registered or got folio numbers for any of the houses in the estate. Did it the old way apparently through the deeds place.

Sorry, no idea what this means. Are you saying her title isn't registered?

Bottom line should the solicitor have informed her of the situation before going ahead and submitting this to the bank as proof of planning compliance without her knowledge.

If there was a material problem with planning, yes. But has anyone confirmed that there is currently a problem?

Mtk wrote: »

Why does my wife have to honour this loan based on the fact her solicitor decieved her?

Because it isn't "based on the fact her solicitor deceived her". Just because her solicitor may have been negligent in the advice they gave her has got nothing to do with whether she needs to repay her mortgage.

System

Mtk wrote: »

The solicitor got a cert of compliance from an engineer. On his planning compliance cert the engineer stated that planning was needed for the properties attic convention.

Seems like you've got a lot of confusion going on here - a certificate of compliance (which i believe is an irish thing only?) would only confirm that things are built to the permissions it has, you wouldn't have a certificate of compliance saying that it doesn't comply - that would defeat the purpose of a certificate.

G_M

Which country are you in?

Mtk

Ireland.........

Mtk

It sounds mad but I do. A cert of compliance is supposed to confirm that the building is built in accordance with planning. The banks in Ireland request one in order to give loan.
The paper says this is a cert of compliance at the top but within the text it confirms the the property is compliant other than needing planning permission for the attic convertion. A complete contradiction. So where does this leave me?

G_M

Mtk wrote: »

Ireland.........

This is a UK website.

Sad to say even Northern Ireland expertise is limited here, but Ireland? Irish law and processes are very different. We are all ignorant. Hence why we are saying we don't understand you.

You need Irish expertise......