Am I mad? Or is the solicitor?

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

loubel said:

But why does the buyer believe that they won't get a clear title? Their solicitor will have checked this.

Because the TR2 states it is without title guarantee, the advice given by the solicitors is for Title Absolute and there is no process being proposed to deal with the discrepancies.

loubel

The sale is without title guarantee because this is a repossession and so the seller is unable to provide anything more than this. This is normal for a repossession and nothing to panic about. This does not impact the property being registered with Title Absolute, which it will still have on completion.

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

Isthisforreal99 said:

Did you pay them for legal advice (usually costly) or did you pay them to do the conveyancing?  Two very different things.

Sounds like buyers remorse and trying to get out of paying the fees incurred.

They went to the solicitors expecting to buy a property and relied on the solicitor to advise them of the services they need. The buyer would not have explicitly advised them that they did not want legal advice, they were depending on the description of the services offered which included statements like "expert legal advice", "The legal process of buying a property is called conveyancing." so the buyer could reasonably expect his legal needs to be covered, and the estimate made explicit reference to additional charges for things like title defects.

TBG01

Where's the title defect? As already pointed out limited title guarantee isn't a defect.

Sorry If I've missed it, but what is your connection to the transaction? You've said you're not the buyer, and you're clearly not the seller so who are you complaining on behalf?

Tiglet2

Limited title guarantee is when the seller (in this case the lender in possession, but could be an Executor of a deceased estate) can't answer questions about the property because they don't know the property.  They have never lived there so have no knowledge of the questions asked in the Property Information Form.  Full Title Guarantee would be given to the buyer on completion.

As far as the other charges are concerned, these would be for the solicitor acting on behalf of the seller to deal with. There would have to be liaison between the lender and the bankrupt owner as to how to deal with these, but it is not your (the buyer) problem and this should all be satisfactorily dealt with before completion.

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

loubel said:

But why does the buyer believe that they won't get a clear title? Their solicitor will have checked this.

Easy, because the TR2 explicitly states it is not providing clear title. If the solicitor has checked this, they have never at any point made the implications of not gaining clear title clear. This is a solicitor that is asking a title to sign to confirm they understand what they are signing, says they are to ask questions on anything they do not understand, the buyer has asked numerous questions that have not been answered or have been answered with "That is normal" (which is not an explanation). So if you pay across money for a transfer which only states that they are removing the mortgage charge and explicitly leaving the High Court and Official Receiver's charge in place, then it is reasonable to assume there is more legwork to do to tidy up the ownership. At no point has the solicitor clarified what the requirements of the buyer were, nor have they provided sufficient information that the buyer can understand the contract they are signing. The contract explicitly transfers the liability for defective title to the buyer and requires the buyer to indemnify the seller for any mistakes in title.

So, yes, you would think the solicitor would check this and explain that the conveyance will not provide clear title, but the report on title is just standard paragraphs associated with a guaranteed title leasehold.

loubel

The TR2 won't refer to any other charge or the bankruptcy entries as it is not the seller who will remove these. They will be removed by the Land Registry when the TR2 is registered.

Clearly the solicitor's report given to the buyer should have been written to take into account the lack of title guarantee due to the repossession, but this does not mean that the title is defective. 

TBG01

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName said:

loubel said:

But why does the buyer believe that they won't get a clear title? Their solicitor will have checked this.

So, yes, you would think the solicitor would check this and explain that the conveyance will not provide clear title, but the report on title is just standard paragraphs associated with a guaranteed title leasehold.

No, you would expect the solicitor to check replies to requisitions (which aren't shared with the client before you jump the gun) to see which charges the solicitor is giving an undertaking to remove.

You still haven't answered what your connection to the transaction is. 

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

TBG01 said:

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName said:

loubel said:

But why does the buyer believe that they won't get a clear title? Their solicitor will have checked this.

So, yes, you would think the solicitor would check this and explain that the conveyance will not provide clear title, but the report on title is just standard paragraphs associated with a guaranteed title leasehold.

No, you would expect the solicitor to check replies to requisitions (which aren't shared with the client before you jump the gun) to see which charges the solicitor is giving an undertaking to remove.

You still haven't answered what your connection to the transaction is. 

The seller has specifically stated they are only removing their charge. All others are remaining. This is 5 months after the start of the transaction. 

My relationship to the buyer is not relevant.

ExEstateAgent

It's probably easier and better if the prospective buyer asks their solicitors to explain.