Stressful Completion - Seller Refused to Move Out!

Ath_Wat

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred, and that seems absurd.

They can stop you entering as that would be trespassing, as you have completed by handing over keys you could either ask the buyer for permission to get the wardrobe. You couldn't at this point just legally walk in.

Does "handing over keys" carry some legal weight, then?  I always believed keys were irrelevant.

Also, the lines quoted above suggest that vacant possession is not given (and therefore completion is not achieved) until all belongings have been removed.

I am not getting any clarity on the actual point of completion here.

From a legal perspective, Completion is usually done over the phone on the contractually agreed date when the solicitors confirm receipt of funds and the keys can be released.   As far as the solicitor is aware, completion has occurred. 

The solicitor is not aware or party to the situation on the ground however, for example they don't know if the seller has vacated or if they are still packing, as they do not visit the property at completion (nor at any time during the conveyancing). 

As has been said before, a completion time of 2pm can be flexible.  The flow of monies from the beginning of the chain to the end can take many hours and the last person in chain is likely to be the last to complete. 

The solicitors have completed their part of the transaction and, unless they are advised to the contrary, they would believe that the second part of the contractual transaction will also occur, if not immediately, then later that day.  They would not know that Completion had NOT taken place until they were told.

So, for Completion to have taken place, two things are legally required.

1.  The agreed purchase monies must be paid (tick), AND

2.  The property must be handed over, with vacant possession (assuming vacant possession is in the contract) (not ticked).

In OP's case, the sellers had failed to Complete so the house did not belong to the OP.  Whoever fails any of the conditions agreed in the contract at exchange, e.g. not giving vacant possession at completion, not remitting funds etc etc, becomes liable for damages and compensation, because they were in breach of the Contract.  The OP is entitled to damages and reimbursement.

To answer your question, Completion is when both points above have been settled.  Point 2 was not settled, therefore in this case the OP did not Complete on the contractually agreed Completion Date.  During the couple of days between the contractually agreed completion date and the date the OP got vacant possession, the property still belonged to the sellers as completion had not occurred.

Hope that clarifies everything?

Thank you.  It does clarify some things.  I would still like to know for certain that if it is solely the presence of the original occupants in the house at 2pm (or whenever) that stops completion happening, or whether leaving their belongings, which also seems to constitute not granting vacant possession according to definitions given, can also prevent completion from happening and stop the buyer from actually owning the house.

Ath_Wat

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred, and that seems absurd.

They can stop you entering as that would be trespassing, as you have completed by handing over keys you could either ask the buyer for permission to get the wardrobe. You couldn't at this point just legally walk in.

Does "handing over keys" carry some legal weight, then?  I always believed keys were irrelevant.

Also, the lines quoted above suggest that vacant possession is not given (and therefore completion is not achieved) until all belongings have been removed.

I am not getting any clarity on the actual point of completion here.

Well yes handing over keys would be in my mind the final stage of completion, the previous owner now has no right to enter the property even if they have a wardrobe in the house. They would need to seek permission to retrieve it or they have surrendered it by leaving it there.

In your mind or in law?

Contractually. They paid the funds and the seller has relinquished the keys therefore legally the transaction has taken place and legal ownership has transferred. The wardrobe or items does not define by law if legally the transaction has completed. 

Even if the seller left all their belongings and still handed over the keys the OP owns the house and would then bill the previous owner for storage or removal of items. 

So is the concept of "handing over the keys" actually written into the contract as being the point at which ownership transfers?  I always believed it was not - what if the keys get lost?  You keep saying it matters, but do you know this for a fact?

Ath_Wat

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred, and that seems absurd.

They can stop you entering as that would be trespassing, as you have completed by handing over keys you could either ask the buyer for permission to get the wardrobe. You couldn't at this point just legally walk in.

Does "handing over keys" carry some legal weight, then?  I always believed keys were irrelevant.

Also, the lines quoted above suggest that vacant possession is not given (and therefore completion is not achieved) until all belongings have been removed.

I am not getting any clarity on the actual point of completion here.

Well yes handing over keys would be in my mind the final stage of completion, the previous owner now has no right to enter the property even if they have a wardrobe in the house. They would need to seek permission to retrieve it or they have surrendered it by leaving it there.

In your mind or in law?

The previous owner has no right to enter the property once keys have been handed over AND the property is vacant.

So again, is "handing over the keys" written into the contract?  

Ath_Wat

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

user1977 said:

Ath_Wat said:

user1977 said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred

If the new owner is in the property then completion has occurred. You might (arguably) be in breach of contract though.

That contradicts "'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer."

No, you're misinterpreting what was said. It's not a prerequisite for completion to occur, but it is a contractual obligation on the vendor to remove their belongings.

So are we now saying vacant possession does not have to be granted for completion to occur?

Vacant possession does have to be granted for completion to occur.

And yet leaving your belongings means vacant possession has not been granted.

Tiglet2

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

user1977 said:

Ath_Wat said:

user1977 said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred

If the new owner is in the property then completion has occurred. You might (arguably) be in breach of contract though.

That contradicts "'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer."

No, you're misinterpreting what was said. It's not a prerequisite for completion to occur, but it is a contractual obligation on the vendor to remove their belongings.

So are we now saying vacant possession does not have to be granted for completion to occur?

Vacant possession does have to be granted for completion to occur.

And yet leaving your belongings means vacant possession has not been granted.

Vacant possession was not granted because the Sellers themselves were still in the property. If the sellers had left for wherever they were moving to, but had left possessions behind, then the new owner would have the responsibility of dealing with it, i.e. asking their solicitor to write to the seller's solicitor advising them that the possessions would be available for collection by such and such a date, or if not, the new owner could hire a skip and dispose of possessions and send the bill to the sellers for reimbursement.

Tiglet2

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred, and that seems absurd.

They can stop you entering as that would be trespassing, as you have completed by handing over keys you could either ask the buyer for permission to get the wardrobe. You couldn't at this point just legally walk in.

Does "handing over keys" carry some legal weight, then?  I always believed keys were irrelevant.

Also, the lines quoted above suggest that vacant possession is not given (and therefore completion is not achieved) until all belongings have been removed.

I am not getting any clarity on the actual point of completion here.

Well yes handing over keys would be in my mind the final stage of completion, the previous owner now has no right to enter the property even if they have a wardrobe in the house. They would need to seek permission to retrieve it or they have surrendered it by leaving it there.

In your mind or in law?

The previous owner has no right to enter the property once keys have been handed over AND the property is vacant.

So again, is "handing over the keys" written into the contract?  

Read the Standard Conditions of Sale yourself - there is no reference to the handing over of keys or possessions left in the property. 

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/property/standard-conditions-of-sale/?msclkid=2feba94cb65811ec8f8e4ddeed40c9b7  

SDLT_Geek

I disagree with a lot of what is being said here. Not that it is very relevant to OP.

Completion of a property transaction occurs when the transfer document, having been signed, is put into legal effect by being dated.  That is nearly always done by conveyancers, usually on a phone call to confirm completion.  Sometimes completion is by arrangement between conveyancers; for example the seller's conveyancer is to date the transfer once the purchase price has been received; afterwards the seller's conveyancer is to notify the buyer's conveyancer.

If conveyancers are first made aware that vacant possession is not available then (if the contract requires vacant possession) it is unlikely that completion will occur, especially if there is borrowed money being used.

If completion does occur (by the transfer document being dated) then beneficial ownership passes at that point.  If the seller has not given vacant possession then the seller is in breach of contract and consequences might follow, but completion still occurred and the buyer is the beneficial owner of the property.

Minor edit: about the notification in para 2.

jonnnyash

Definitely still need to establish whether legal completion has taken place or not. Your solicitor must know.

Ath_Wat

SDLT_Geek said:

I disagree with a lot of what is being said here. Not that it is very relevant to OP.

Completion of a property transaction occurs when the transfer document, having been signed, is put into legal effect by being dated.  That is nearly always done by conveyancers, usually on a phone call to confirm completion.  Sometimes completion is by arrangement between conveyancers; for example the seller's conveyancer is to date the transfer once the purchase price has been received; afterwards the seller's conveyancer is to notify the buyer's conveyancer.

If conveyancers are first made aware that vacant possession is not available then (if the contract requires vacant possession) it is unlikely that completion will occur, especially if there is borrowed money being used.

If completion does occur (by the transfer document being dated) then beneficial ownership passes at that point.  If the seller has not given vacant possession then the seller is in breach of contract and consequences might follow, but completion still occurred and the buyer is the beneficial owner of the property.

Minor edit: about the notification in para 2.

Thank you.  That makes absolute sense.

So keys have nothing to do with it.

Ath_Wat

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

user1977 said:

Ath_Wat said:

user1977 said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred

If the new owner is in the property then completion has occurred. You might (arguably) be in breach of contract though.

That contradicts "'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer."

No, you're misinterpreting what was said. It's not a prerequisite for completion to occur, but it is a contractual obligation on the vendor to remove their belongings.

So are we now saying vacant possession does not have to be granted for completion to occur?

Vacant possession does have to be granted for completion to occur.

And yet leaving your belongings means vacant possession has not been granted.

Vacant possession was not granted because the Sellers themselves were still in the property. If the sellers had left for wherever they were moving to, but had left possessions behind, then the new owner would have the responsibility of dealing with it, i.e. asking their solicitor to write to the seller's solicitor advising them that the possessions would be available for collection by such and such a date, or if not, the new owner could hire a skip and dispose of possessions and send the bill to the sellers for reimbursement.

I know that is true in this case; but previously people have claimed leaving possessions stops vacant possession occurring and also that vacant possession not being granted  would prevent the sale completing.  We now know that this is not  the case.  The sale may not be completed if vacant possession is not granted, but if it is completed, the lack of vacant possession does not nullify the transaction.

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

Emmia said:

Ath_Wat said:

Tiglet2 said:

From a legal perspective, under standard conditions of sale, the latest time a seller should vacate a property is 2pm. This time can be changed in the contract and will be agreed between the solicitors before contracts are exchanged. Obviously, it is difficult sometimes to judge how quickly the removals van can load up, or the seller is overwhelmed by the amount of work needed to pack, so there should be some leeway given if vacant possession is delayed by an hour or so.  However, in this situation, vacant possession did not take place at any time on completion day which meant that the seller was in breach of this.  The buyer could/should have notified their solicitor.  At this point, OP's solicitor should have called and emailed the seller’s solicitor.

Technically, OP would have been in a position to charge interest as the seller was in breach of contract by not vacating in the specified time.  Interest is usually charged at 4% above base so, with today’s base rate of 0.75%, the interest would be calculated as 4.75% of the total purchase price on a pro-rata daily basis. OP could potentially have demanded damages as well, such as extra removal costs, hotel charges and so on, if applicable, though costs should be reasonable and not taking the p.

In reality, it can be difficult to actually receive the interest and damages as the seller needs to agree to the payment. Some sellers will be absolutely upstanding about it and allow their solicitor to deduct interest from their completion funds, if their solicitor hasn’t yet released them to the seller. Other sellers, however, may refuse to do this, and the buyer would need to pursue the amount through the courts. This is something most buyers don’t do as the court costs would probably exceed the amount being claimed.

Hopefully OP is in the middle of moving in now and this will all be a distant memory.

I'd be interested in the following, as may some others who might see this thread in future, if you have the answers.

What exactly does vacant possession consist of?  If they are not in the house but their possessions/some of their possessions are, is that vacant possession?

If vacant possession is not granted at 2pm (or the arranged time) but the money has been paid, does the buyer have the right to enter the premises by whatever means they deem fit?

Vacant possession means... 

'When buying or selling a property with ‘vacant possession’ the property needs to be empty on the day of completion. This means the sellers or tenants have moved out and removed all of their belongings, only leaving behind items that have been agreed with the buyer.

In England and Wales a property can be sold either with or without vacant possession.

If the property is sold without vacant possession, this usually means there will be tenants in situ. Any tenancy agreement relating to the property must be included in the contract because when you’re buying a property you need to know who, if anyone, is living in it and on what terms.'

https://www.co-oplegalservices.co.uk/media-centre/articles-may-aug-2017/what-is-vacant-possession/

Other definition providers are available, but this one seemed to be the most comprehensive... 

OK, that doesn't really answer my question at all though; I had already googled it.  That implies that if I leave an old wardrobe in the back bedroom the new owner can't stop me re-entering the house, as completion has not occurred, and that seems absurd.

They can stop you entering as that would be trespassing, as you have completed by handing over keys you could either ask the buyer for permission to get the wardrobe. You couldn't at this point just legally walk in.

Does "handing over keys" carry some legal weight, then?  I always believed keys were irrelevant.

Also, the lines quoted above suggest that vacant possession is not given (and therefore completion is not achieved) until all belongings have been removed.

I am not getting any clarity on the actual point of completion here.

Well yes handing over keys would be in my mind the final stage of completion, the previous owner now has no right to enter the property even if they have a wardrobe in the house. They would need to seek permission to retrieve it or they have surrendered it by leaving it there.

In your mind or in law?

The previous owner has no right to enter the property once keys have been handed over AND the property is vacant.

So again, is "handing over the keys" written into the contract?  

Read the Standard Conditions of Sale yourself - there is no reference to the handing over of keys or possessions left in the property. 

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/property/standard-conditions-of-sale/?msclkid=2feba94cb65811ec8f8e4ddeed40c9b7  

That's what I thought,  but people have been continually claiming that "handing over the keys" is relevant to whether ownership has passed.