Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • hc25036
    • By hc25036 12th Sep 18, 11:02 AM
    • 375Posts
    • 173Thanks
    hc25036
    s106 - again(UPDATE AND PLEASE HELP!)
    • #1
    • 12th Sep 18, 11:02 AM
    s106 - again(UPDATE AND PLEASE HELP!) 12th Sep 18 at 11:02 AM
    A search shows me that this has come up a few times, but my poor daughter is at her wits end!

    She moved abroad at short notice and is selling (her first time) a shared-ownership flat to a first-time buyer. The flat is on a huge (thousands of properties) mature development by Linden. Despite the shared ownership, it is my daughter's responsibility to do the selling. She had to use a solicitor approved by the co-owner (a housing trust).

    Many weeks into the sale (deposit paid by the buyer about 6 weeks ago), the buyer's solicitor raised a question asking for confirmation that the s106 commitments had been met. The response from my daughter's solicitor was that the Law Society Protocol says that this is the responsibility of the buyer's solicitor.

    We've discovered that the solicitor ping-pong (same question, same response) has been going on for weeks and that it is the only thing holding up the sale. The buyer is getting cold feet and is threatening to pull out - I've met her a couple of times and feel really sorry for her too.

    Can anyone suggest a way to break the circle? I've suggested that my daughter just instructs her solicitor to get the documents and pays the extra cost.

    Any other thoughts? Currently there are dozens of properties on the estate on the market and a conservative estimate is that several thousand properties have changed hands since the initial buyers moved in. If s106 was an issue, surely that would have come to light by now...
    Last edited by hc25036; 14-09-2018 at 5:42 PM.
Page 1
    • SmashedAvacado
    • By SmashedAvacado 12th Sep 18, 11:38 AM
    • 449 Posts
    • 461 Thanks
    SmashedAvacado
    • #2
    • 12th Sep 18, 11:38 AM
    • #2
    • 12th Sep 18, 11:38 AM
    has either the buyer looked at what those s106 commitments are? and contacted the local authority for confirmation as to what if anything remains to be done.

    the ones that are typically of concern are the obligations to pay monies - and the LA should be able to confirm this. The remaining will be practical and will be set out in the 106 agreement - eg not to allow first occupation of the property until a road is relaid or something like that. It may be apparent from inspection as to whether these obligations have been satisfied.
    • xylophone
    • By xylophone 12th Sep 18, 3:41 PM
    • 27,242 Posts
    • 16,303 Thanks
    xylophone
    • #3
    • 12th Sep 18, 3:41 PM
    • #3
    • 12th Sep 18, 3:41 PM
    I've suggested that my daughter just instructs her solicitor to get the documents and pays the extra cost.
    I notice that the Conveyancing Association Protocol says that the vendor's lawyer should be

    Assisting the buyer’s lawyer wherever possible by advising the seller that they are required to provide, at their own expense, documents which will be required by the buyer. For example, s.106 Planning Act Agreements of any age, Road and Sewer Adoption Agreements where a road or sewer is unadopted etc.1
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 12th Sep 18, 3:49 PM
    • 9,056 Posts
    • 9,648 Thanks
    davidmcn
    • #4
    • 12th Sep 18, 3:49 PM
    • #4
    • 12th Sep 18, 3:49 PM
    She had to use a solicitor approved by the co-owner (a housing trust).

    Many weeks into the sale (deposit paid by the buyer about 6 weeks ago), the buyer's solicitor raised a question asking for confirmation that the s106 commitments had been met.
    Originally posted by hc25036
    Surely her solicitor ought to have the answers at their fingertips if they've had umpteen previous transactions involving the same planning agreement? Are they saying they don't know, or are they refusing to cooperate out of a matter of principle?
    • hc25036
    • By hc25036 12th Sep 18, 5:29 PM
    • 375 Posts
    • 173 Thanks
    hc25036
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 18, 5:29 PM
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 18, 5:29 PM
    Maybe, just maybe sorted. Buyers solicitor has sent a link to the documents to the buyers solicitor...

    Thanks all for your help.
    • xylophone
    • By xylophone 12th Sep 18, 5:34 PM
    • 27,242 Posts
    • 16,303 Thanks
    xylophone
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 18, 5:34 PM
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 18, 5:34 PM
    Buyers solicitor has sent a link to the documents to the buyers solicitor...
    That's helpful....
    • hc25036
    • By hc25036 12th Sep 18, 6:05 PM
    • 375 Posts
    • 173 Thanks
    hc25036
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 18, 6:05 PM
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 18, 6:05 PM
    It's the stress I tell you! Seller's solicitor has sent a link to the buyer's solicitor!!
    • hc25036
    • By hc25036 14th Sep 18, 5:41 PM
    • 375 Posts
    • 173 Thanks
    hc25036
    • #8
    • 14th Sep 18, 5:41 PM
    • #8
    • 14th Sep 18, 5:41 PM
    Well, I was so wrong. The seller's solicitor sent a web link to what they say are the relevant documents to the buyer's solicitor. The buyer's solicitor has told the buyer that she has received neither the documents nor confirmation that the buyer will have no financial concerns in the future.

    The buyer and seller are both polite young women who do not want to challenge the lawyers. The sale is about to fall through with the buyer a few hundred pounds out of pocket and the seller a few thousand out of pocket (mortgage on an empty flat).

    The seller's solicitor has said the Law Society protocol states it is the buyer's side who should find planning approval stuff (but does not specify s106) and the buyer's solicitor says it is the seller's side who should do that (as it says specifically for s106 in the Conveyancy Society protocol). BUT the Conveyancy Society protocol says that the Law Society protocol takes preference where the two disagree.

    You couldn't make this up, and two young women are the losers. Can anyone ffer a crumb of hope.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 14th Sep 18, 5:53 PM
    • 9,056 Posts
    • 9,648 Thanks
    davidmcn
    • #9
    • 14th Sep 18, 5:53 PM
    • #9
    • 14th Sep 18, 5:53 PM
    If both the solicitors are useless than perhaps either the buyer or seller can contact the planners and get whatever is being sought.
    • xylophone
    • By xylophone 14th Sep 18, 10:17 PM
    • 27,242 Posts
    • 16,303 Thanks
    xylophone
    Has your daughter tried contacting the local planning authority and asking whether any S106 commitments in respect of her development have been met?
    • hc25036
    • By hc25036 15th Sep 18, 4:51 PM
    • 375 Posts
    • 173 Thanks
    hc25036
    Many thanks - email sent today and a phone call planned for Monday.

    The buyer’s solicitor is asking for confirmation that will be no future liability, yet a planning search shows 2 active appeals (both asking for more time to complete public areas).

    So, the developer is still engaged with the Council which should be a good sign.

    The fine detail is the the seller’s lawyer has provided a link to documents that are too large to send by email and the buyer’s lawyer is saying she hasn’t received the documents. I just want to bang their heads together and tell them to grow up...
    • Sg33
    • By Sg33 15th Sep 18, 6:30 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Sg33
    We had the same issue when buying a property and in the end we just got an indemnity policy to cover it. I don't know if this would be an option?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,550Posts Today

8,621Users online

Martin's Twitter