Charges on Land register query

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Charges on Land register query

    Apologies in advance if this has been addressed previously I am a novice here so please do point me to the post.

    I have applied for my first re-mortgage the legal team acting on behalf of the bank have told me that there is a "Lease dated 17 May 1926 to William Thomas Little for 99 years from 25 March 1926". This is known as an unregistered lease, we cannot proceed with this in place. This entry will either need removing or if still in place will need correctly registering as a leasehold title."

    There is indeed a charge on the Register of Title regarding the lease however, there is a note "No copy of the lease referred to is held by HM Land Registry"

    A second charge appears, "A conveyance of the land in this title dated 19 March 1984 made between (1) The City of Birmingham District Council and (2) Kenneth B***** and Muriel B****** contain restrictive covenants." NOTE: Original filed.

    I have a copy of the conveyance which was sent to me when I completed my purchase. It is in legal talk which I'm finding hard to follow but I think it is the council sale of the house to the folks named in the second charge. Would this have overwritten the lease?

    I had no issue with my initial mortgage on my freehold property with the charge on the register so am quite stumped by it being an issue now.
    Either way can someone please advise me how I can get the lease issue resolved to get my current mortgage deal?

    Much appreciated

    #2
    When a leaseholder buys the freehold the lease does not automatically get merged into the freehold.

    In modern times an application would have to be made to Land Registry to cancel the leasehold title, otherwise the leasehold title continues to exist even though the freeholder is the same person as the leaseholder.

    I can only guess that at some time after 1926, the freehold was conveyed to the sitting tenant who did not deal with the lease by merging it into the freehold.

    The fact that Birmingham Council transferred the freehold in 1984 would mean that after the new owners had been in possession of the property for more than 12 years, they would have extinguished the leasehold title due to adverse possession and would be the leaseholders as well as the freeholders.

    That is why your original solicitor let you go ahead and buy the property using a mortgage, since there was no likelihood that there was not a good title being transferred to you.

    The current firm of solicitors seems not to be accepting that situation, suggesting they are far more cautious than the previous solicitor when acting on behalf of the new mortgage company.

    Has a copy of the 1984 conveyance been provided to the new solicitor to confirm that you are in possession of the property that has not been tenanted since at least 1984.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by ZaraBUK View Post
      I had no issue with my initial mortgage on my freehold property with the charge on the register so am quite stumped by it being an issue now.
      I think that is something that the conveyancer who acted on your purchase should explain.

      Comment

      Latest Activity

      Collapse

      Working...
      X