Issue with selling property which has two titles, one in the wrong name.

GDB2222

user1977 said:

GDB2222 said:

user1977 said:

Fred2023 said:

propertyrental said:

Fred2023 said:

user1977 said:

Fred2023 said:

propertyrental said:

Fred2023 said:

Yes I could go to land registry and get copies, but regardless of that I have been told the properties has two titles one of which is still in the previous owners names. My current buyers solicitors have advised the buyers not to proceed until both titles are in my names. 

Does not mean that advice might not change. Or your buyers may choose to ignore the advice. Or your next buyers might get different advice. So understanding the issue properly is worthwhile.

So regardless of what part of the property makes up the titles, the issue remains that I need both titles in my name and need to find a way of doing this. The quickest way of doing this would be to get the previous owners to sign them over, the male party has done this but the female party (they are now divorced) is not making any contact despite me offering money to compensate their time. So any suggestions as to how I proceed.

Already covered in the previous 3 pages. I doubt anyone now is going to suddenly present a magic new option.

maybe I have not read it right but from reading the last 3 pages I cannot see any solutions offered which have not been tried.

So (as I've already mentioned twice above) have you discussed with your solicitor how much of a problem the flying freehold actually is? Does this second title contain anything other than the land under the flying freehold? I don't think you've clarified that so far. As already suggested, posting the plans here would help everybody understand the position better.

The only option I can see is potentially taking the female party to court, but for what exactly? Ideally I need to know that there is no other option before going down this route.
I have heard (don't know how true it is) that female is housebound, I don't know if that is through disability, health, mental health reasons, but if that is the case then would make court action harder?

Not really, given that conducting legal action rarely involves having to leave the house, and I doubt it literally means it's impossible for her to go outside.

.....I would gladly draw a sketch of the property (like I said before actual plans are with my solicitor) and if I can work out how to attach a drawing, but by doing this, how exactly would it help?

It would help not one jot! As there would still be an element of guesswork. As user1977 has said, you have clarified things a bit (though from memory, not fact) inasmuch as we now know (subject to caveats) that the FF is over a public footpath rather than, say, next door's sitting room.

But only the Title and Plan will give full information including for example possible maintenance obligations/rights.

like I said before actual plans are with my solicitor)

Frankly given your (justifiable) concern and lack of clarity, I am staggered you are not prepared to spend 10 minutes, and £3 (or better still £6) getting the Plan and Title.

Yes this is a 'moneysaving'site, but when spending £X00,000, saving £6 is just plaIn........

the fact remains unless both titles are in my name the new buyers solicitors will advise them not to buy.

How can you be certain of that? Like I've already said, it's understandable that's their preferred position, but if you tell them they're not getting the second title, are they really going to flounce off? Or will they consider other options that would enable the transaction to proceed?

If my solicitor said that I needed two titles, and the seller could only provide one, I might take a view if I were a 100% cash buyer. But, anybody needing a mortgage would be dependent on their lender, and they tend to be very cautious. 

Luckily the lenders have thought about this issue before and most have a policy readily available:

https://lendershandbook.ukfinance.org.uk/lenders-handbook/englandandwales/question-list/1835/

As you'll see, it's generally going to be mortgageable if only a relatively small part of the property is affected.

I’m probably being terribly slow, so could you explain a bit more please.

 The link you gave shows that many lenders will lend on flying freeholds. My understanding is that that is where the seller has title to the whole property, but part of it is over another building or someone else’s land. 

I thought that this is different? The op said:

What has come back is a plan of the property with a red boundary on the ground floor (the red outline does not cover the small upstairs bit of the bedroom which just out over the pathway underneath) and this comes under a title number. It only shows one title number and this is registered to me.

So, he has registered title to all but a bit of the property. That’s quite a significant bit, as it is part of a bedroom, rather than the potting shed at the bottom of the garden say. 

Admittedly he uses the bedroom and nobody else has access to it, but he does not have good title to the whole of the bedroom.

That is my understanding, and I may be utterly mistaken, so I think it might help the OP as well as me if you explain.

user1977

GDB2222 said:

user1977 said:

GDB2222 said:

user1977 said:

Fred2023 said:

propertyrental said:

Fred2023 said:

user1977 said:

Fred2023 said:

propertyrental said:

Fred2023 said:

Yes I could go to land registry and get copies, but regardless of that I have been told the properties has two titles one of which is still in the previous owners names. My current buyers solicitors have advised the buyers not to proceed until both titles are in my names. 

Does not mean that advice might not change. Or your buyers may choose to ignore the advice. Or your next buyers might get different advice. So understanding the issue properly is worthwhile.

So regardless of what part of the property makes up the titles, the issue remains that I need both titles in my name and need to find a way of doing this. The quickest way of doing this would be to get the previous owners to sign them over, the male party has done this but the female party (they are now divorced) is not making any contact despite me offering money to compensate their time. So any suggestions as to how I proceed.

Already covered in the previous 3 pages. I doubt anyone now is going to suddenly present a magic new option.

maybe I have not read it right but from reading the last 3 pages I cannot see any solutions offered which have not been tried.

So (as I've already mentioned twice above) have you discussed with your solicitor how much of a problem the flying freehold actually is? Does this second title contain anything other than the land under the flying freehold? I don't think you've clarified that so far. As already suggested, posting the plans here would help everybody understand the position better.

The only option I can see is potentially taking the female party to court, but for what exactly? Ideally I need to know that there is no other option before going down this route.
I have heard (don't know how true it is) that female is housebound, I don't know if that is through disability, health, mental health reasons, but if that is the case then would make court action harder?

Not really, given that conducting legal action rarely involves having to leave the house, and I doubt it literally means it's impossible for her to go outside.

.....I would gladly draw a sketch of the property (like I said before actual plans are with my solicitor) and if I can work out how to attach a drawing, but by doing this, how exactly would it help?

It would help not one jot! As there would still be an element of guesswork. As user1977 has said, you have clarified things a bit (though from memory, not fact) inasmuch as we now know (subject to caveats) that the FF is over a public footpath rather than, say, next door's sitting room.

But only the Title and Plan will give full information including for example possible maintenance obligations/rights.

like I said before actual plans are with my solicitor)

Frankly given your (justifiable) concern and lack of clarity, I am staggered you are not prepared to spend 10 minutes, and £3 (or better still £6) getting the Plan and Title.

Yes this is a 'moneysaving'site, but when spending £X00,000, saving £6 is just plaIn........

the fact remains unless both titles are in my name the new buyers solicitors will advise them not to buy.

How can you be certain of that? Like I've already said, it's understandable that's their preferred position, but if you tell them they're not getting the second title, are they really going to flounce off? Or will they consider other options that would enable the transaction to proceed?

If my solicitor said that I needed two titles, and the seller could only provide one, I might take a view if I were a 100% cash buyer. But, anybody needing a mortgage would be dependent on their lender, and they tend to be very cautious. 

Luckily the lenders have thought about this issue before and most have a policy readily available:

https://lendershandbook.ukfinance.org.uk/lenders-handbook/englandandwales/question-list/1835/

As you'll see, it's generally going to be mortgageable if only a relatively small part of the property is affected.

That is my understanding, and I may be utterly mistaken, so I think it might help the OP as well as me if you explain.

It's not been tremendously easy to follow, but my advice above assumed that the OP's reference to a flying freehold meant their title included that (and the missing title was for the freehold beneath). If in fact the missing title is the flying freehold, that's a different problem...

GDB2222

In theory, and I agree it is utterly absurd and theoretical, the legal owners could lean a ladder against that bit of the house from the public path, and knock an entry hole. Then erect a partition wall in the OP’s bedroom. They can then use their bit of the bedroom as they want.

Theoretically. 

Fred2023

Yes from what I understand (excuse my limited knowledge on titles etc) but the title that is still in the old occupants name is for the upstairs bedroom part which over hangs the footpath and not the ground underneath. I could have that wrong and will try to clarify this with my solicitor. But can I ask what difference that really makes? Based on that in can see three scenarios

1) the title is for the bedroom part only

2) the title is for the ground underneath (public footpath)

3) the title is for the upper floor bedroom and the ground underneath (public footpath)
I cannot see the title for being the ground underneath as this is a public footpath.

If the title is for either of the above three, what difference does this make, as basically which ever scenario it is, the fact is that the title is still in the old occupants name and because of this the new buyers solicitor will not accept it. So basically the only way to access this upstairs part of the bedroom without going through the house would be with a ladder as GB2222 suggest.
GB2222 also states

"So, he has registered title to all but a bit of the property. That’s quite a significant bit, as it is part of a bedroom, rather than the potting shed at the bottom of the garden say". - and I would say yes, that about sums it up, it is that little bit of the property that is still registered to the old occupants on the title.

GDB2222

If you had good title to the whole bedroom, but not the footpath underneath, I don’t think it would matter, as @user1977 says. But not having title to the whole house - well, that’s a big problem. 

I think you need to find out what the lady's issues are with signing the paperwork. It may be something like she has moved, and the paperwork has not reached her. Or, she may be unwell, so uninterested. In either case, offering more money won’t help. A tracing agency might be a good idea, just to check the address your solicitor has is correct.  Have a word with the ex-husband, too. 

 I would take this out of your solicitor’s hands for now, as her letters are clearly not useful, and presumably costing you money.

GDB2222

The only time I used a private detective, it was very successful and not terribly expensive. 

Fred2023

Unfortunately I have no idea why the female cannot sign the paperwork, she has not responded at all and so has given no indication why. Between the couple they have three children, through Facebook I have contacted every single person and the only person to reply is the male party and he has been very helpful and signed the paperwork. He is the one who gave contact details of the female to my solicitor. The male has done his part and is now refusing messages via Facebook. So basically I have to treat it as the female party is for whatever reason refusing to help and have to find out how I can get around this. I presume there must be a way around this? Potentially I can take the female to court, but what for exactly? And if I did take her to court how could I get court costs payable by her? At the moment as it stands she has done absolutely nothing wrong and I presume it is well within her right not to sign so how could court costs be down to her? It is soooooo frustrating!!!!!!!!

GDB2222

Fred2023 said:

Unfortunately I have no idea why the female cannot sign the paperwork, she has not responded at all and so has given no indication why. Between the couple they have three children, through Facebook I have contacted every single person and the only person to reply is the male party and he has been very helpful and signed the paperwork. He is the one who gave contact details of the female to my solicitor. The male has done his part and is now refusing messages via Facebook. So basically I have to treat it as the female party is for whatever reason refusing to help and have to find out how I can get around this. I presume there must be a way around this? Potentially I can take the female to court, but what for exactly? And if I did take her to court how could I get court costs payable by her? At the moment as it stands she has done absolutely nothing wrong and I presume it is well within her right not to sign so how could court costs be down to her? It is soooooo frustrating!!!!!!!!

You have had advice from a couple of posters to get a more litigation-oriented solicitor involved. I think you have a case, as the couple promised to sell you the whole property, but have failed to deliver. Judges are not fools, and they will be on your side to sort out this practical problem. I think you will get your court order, and that pretty much automatically means you'll be awarded costs.

NB: Even if awarded costs, that generally only covers around 70% of your costs, so expect to be a few £k out of pocket even if you win. 

The only alternative is to contact the lady direct. 

eddddy

GDB2222 said:

You have had advice from a couple of posters to get a more litigation-oriented solicitor involved. I think you have a case, as the couple promised to sell you the whole property, but have failed to deliver. Judges are not fools, and they will be on your side to sort out this practical problem. I think you will get your court order, and that pretty much automatically means you'll be awarded costs.

I might have missed something in the thread - but why are you thinking that the couple "promised to sell the OP the whole property". 

The OP hasn't confirmed that the contract said 2 titles would be transferred.

It's quite possible that the contract said that just one title was being transferred, and that one title has been transferred. (Because neither the sellers nor the OP realised that 2 titles need to be transferred.)  So the sellers have done nothing wrong legally.


If the contract really did say that 2 titles would be transferred, but only 1 title was transferred, that sounds like serious negligence by the solicitors. But in that case, I guess the sellers might have a legal duty to help put things right.

Emily_Joy

@Fred2023 have you considered sending some flowers to the female party with a polite letter introducing yourself and describing your problem in simple English? I would also include a prepaid self-addressed envelope, my email address and phone number.