Help, restricted covenant, title cannot be transferred

Faddi777

Thanks everyone for the valuable input and time.
I have noted all feedback.

The reason i asked estate agents responsibility in this matter was because PRS purposed an amount to be awared to me because of negligence from estate agent side which i refused before and now they have given me time after reviewing the matter again to agree or disagree with the amount which they think is reasonable. 
Im still  convinced that estate agent is equally responsible for this as they lead me into making my decision to buy this property.
-On the basis that they failed to disclosed key information.
-lack of professional diligence, not carrying out reasonable checks which an everage consumer should know or expect estate agent to be aware of .
The suggested amount is the fee they charge from seller , which i think isn't a punishment, as this amount is what they gain with proceeding of wrongly described listing.(this is just my opinion)

What i have gathered from comments, the way forward from here is to get another solicitor to look into this case, and my solicito/conveyancer is fully responsible for this matter.
I have lost contact with my solicitor who solely blamed all on seller's solicitor for this in his last email.
My solicitor aware that i have complained to legal ombudsman about his service( being unhappy about conveyancing process, unnecessary delays, lies , postponed completion date) 

 And did tell him in last email that i ll take legal advice after i found   out about restriction.
Since then had no contact. I did previously put a formal complaint  and as usual they just said we are liasing with seller solicitor and HA/ council to resolve this matter . 
Can i make a separate another complain to legal ombudsman (about restricted covenant)  or just persue with getting another solicitor to resolve the issue.

Thanks again for the time and support 

housebuyer143

Faddi777 said:

Thanks everyone for the valuable input and time.
I have noted all feedback.

The reason i asked estate agents responsibility in this matter was because PRS purposed an amount to be awared to me because of negligence from estate agent side which i refused before and now they have given me time after reviewing the matter again to agree or disagree with the amount which they think is reasonable. 
Im still  convinced that estate agent is equally responsible for this as they lead me into making my decision to buy this property.
-On the basis that they failed to disclosed key information.
-lack of professional diligence, not carrying out reasonable checks which an everage consumer should know or expect estate agent to be aware of .
The suggested amount is the fee they charge from seller , which i think isn't a punishment, as this amount is what they gain with proceeding of wrongly described listing.(this is just my opinion)

What i have gathered from comments, the way forward from here is to get another solicitor to look into this case, and my solicito/conveyancer is fully responsible for this matter.
I have lost contact with my solicitor who solely blamed all on seller's solicitor for this in his last email.
My solicitor aware that i have complained to legal ombudsman about his service( being unhappy about conveyancing process, unnecessary delays, lies , postponed completion date) 

 And did tell him in last email that i ll take legal advice after i found   out about restriction.
Since then had no contact. I did previously put a formal complaint  and as usual they just said we are liasing with seller solicitor and HA/ council to resolve this matter . 
Can i make a separate another complain to legal ombudsman (about restricted covenant)  or just persue with getting another solicitor to resolve the issue.

Thanks again for the time and support 

I would make another formal complaint and tell them you want them to make it right and ask them to explain what they have been doing so far and when they expect a resolution - stress the financial and emotional stress this is putting on you due to the negligence. Make it clear you paid them to do due diligence and checking the title for restrictions is the bare minimum you expect them to do and clearly they have failed to do this and in doing so you have bought a property that you are unable to gain legal ownership of.
If you then do not get a response you are happy with raise this complaint seperatly with the ombudsman. 
I would hold off on paying another lawyer at this stage because I am not sure how another lawyer plans to clear this up any better than the one you have. 

See what response the lawyer and ombudsman come back with and if you are still not happy then look into taking it further with court action I would say. 

EssexHebridean

As suggested before, you need to escalate this within the solicitors firm by going to the “supervising partner” whose name you were given at the beginning of the transaction.

MobileSaver

Faddi777 said:

Im still  convinced that estate agent is equally responsible for this a
-On the basis that they failed to disclosed key information.

Do you have evidence that the EA was aware of key information that they failed to disclose? (I'm thinking that maybe you do since I'd be surprised otherwise that the PRS found in your favour.)

Faddi777 said:

not carrying out reasonable checks which an everage consumer should know or expect estate agent to be aware of .

Assuming you are referring to the restrictive covenant being missed as being a "reasonable check", that's (currently) the solicitor's responsibility and not the EA's responsibility (unless they had previously been made aware of it). There has been talk of making it a legal requirement for EAs to actively check and disclose such information but as far as I know that is not yet in legislation.

Faddi777 said:

I have lost contact with my solicitor who solely blamed all on seller's solicitor for this in his last email.

I suggested last week that this might be the case; if the seller's solicitor gave undertakings that the restrictions would be complied with then they are probably the ones at fault, not your solicitor.
However you don't know who asked or undertook what which is why as advised you need to immediately start the formal complaint process.

user1977

MobileSaver said:

Faddi777 said:

Im still  convinced that estate agent is equally responsible for this a
-On the basis that they failed to disclosed key information.

Do you have evidence that the EA was aware of key information that they failed to disclose? (I'm thinking that maybe you do since I'd be surprised otherwise that the PRS found in your favour.)

Faddi777 said:

not carrying out reasonable checks which an everage consumer should know or expect estate agent to be aware of .

Assuming you are referring to the restrictive covenant being missed as being a "reasonable check", that's (currently) the solicitor's responsibility and not the EA's responsibility (unless they had previously been made aware of it). There has been talk of making it a legal requirement for EAs to actively check and disclose such information but as far as I know that is not yet in legislation.

If EAs were expected to carry out due diligence to that sort of depth, you'd really be talking about them having to get their own solicitors to check the title, get searches etc, rather than trust what their client is telling them.

While it's possible that might avoid a tiny number of situations like the OP's (and that's not certain, given we've still managed to have two lots of solicitors completely overlook the problem - why not three?!), how much more cumbersome and expensive do people want the process to become?

MobileSaver

user1977 said:

MobileSaver said:

Faddi777 said:

Im still  convinced that estate agent is equally responsible for this a
-On the basis that they failed to disclosed key information.

Do you have evidence that the EA was aware of key information that they failed to disclose? (I'm thinking that maybe you do since I'd be surprised otherwise that the PRS found in your favour.)

Faddi777 said:

not carrying out reasonable checks which an everage consumer should know or expect estate agent to be aware of .

Assuming you are referring to the restrictive covenant being missed as being a "reasonable check", that's (currently) the solicitor's responsibility and not the EA's responsibility (unless they had previously been made aware of it). There has been talk of making it a legal requirement for EAs to actively check and disclose such information but as far as I know that is not yet in legislation.

If EAs were expected to carry out due diligence to that sort of depth, you'd really be talking about them having to get their own solicitors to check the title, get searches etc, rather than trust what their client is telling them.

That was exactly my first thoughts; EAs would simply be duplicating the solicitor's work and incurring additional fees which would of course have to be passed on to either the buyer or seller.

I came to the conclusion that if it did become mandatory for EAs to disclose restrictions then all they would do is download the Land Registry documents for £3 and list verbatim the restrictions with absolutely no explanation as to what they might mean - that way EAs shouldn't need any solicitor interaction...

Flugelhorn

user1977 said:

 given we've still managed to have two lots of solicitors completely overlook the problem 

This is the bit that seems such a puzzle, surely one of them noticed

user1977

Flugelhorn said:

user1977 said:

 given we've still managed to have two lots of solicitors completely overlook the problem 

This is the bit that seems such a puzzle, surely one of them noticed

You'd expect so, but once in a blue moon you're going to have everybody involved in a transaction being completely incompetent...

Flugelhorn

user1977 said:

Flugelhorn said:

user1977 said:

 given we've still managed to have two lots of solicitors completely overlook the problem 

This is the bit that seems such a puzzle, surely one of them noticed

You'd expect so, but once in a blue moon you're going to have everybody involved in a transaction being completely incompetent...

Swiss cheese model comes to mind. 

GDB2222

MobileSaver said:

Faddi777 said:

Im still  convinced that estate agent is equally responsible for this a
-On the basis that they failed to disclosed key information.

Do you have evidence that the EA was aware of key information that they failed to disclose? (I'm thinking that maybe you do since I'd be surprised otherwise that the PRS found in your favour.)

Faddi777 said:

not carrying out reasonable checks which an everage consumer should know or expect estate agent to be aware of .

Assuming you are referring to the restrictive covenant being missed as being a "reasonable check", that's (currently) the solicitor's responsibility and not the EA's responsibility (unless they had previously been made aware of it). There has been talk of making it a legal requirement for EAs to actively check and disclose such information but as far as I know that is not yet in legislation.

Faddi777 said:

I have lost contact with my solicitor who solely blamed all on seller's solicitor for this in his last email.

I suggested last week that this might be the case; if the seller's solicitor gave undertakings that the restrictions would be complied with then they are probably the ones at fault, not your solicitor.
However you don't know who asked or undertook what which is why as advised you need to immediately start the formal complaint process.

If the seller's solicitor gave undertakings that they have not complied with, I’d expect the buyer’s solicitor to be all over this. The SRA will enforce compliance with undertakings if necessary. 

Besides that, if the requirement was to sell at a 50% discount but the price was 100%, that cannot be corrected by the seller's solicitor, anyway. 

And we still have not heard from the op whether he complied with the requirements to be eligible for the 50% discount.