can't sell our house, dissolved management company restriction on a freehold house

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

    can't sell our house, dissolved management company restriction on a freehold house

    Good Afternoon,

    I hope someone can help me with this issue. We are in the process of selling our freehold house, but our conveyencer does not really know what to do at the moment.
    The house was built back in 2008, there was a management company /lets call it C1/ which has been dissolved after a year or so. I managed to find the old director's mail address, contacted him. He advised me that all the management rights were taken over by an other company /C2/ . Then I called C2, to help us remove the restriction.
    There is an RX3 form submitted to the land registry, but they are asking for evidence to remove the restrictions. After a few days C2 contacted me and my conveyencer, asking for the form so they can sign it. After a few days C2 could not find anyone who has the right to sign it. They found out, that there is no one who manage the property, but the Liverpool council has the rights of managing the streets, etc. Not the house. The council is not helpful at all!

    So the question is, how can we remove the restriction? The buyer is cash buyer, but he won't buy unless we get the restriction removed ASAP.
    Lenders are not happy either to give mortgage with the restriction.
    Land Registry needs the form signed, but no one wants to sign it.

    #2
    What is the wording of the restriction on the transfer of a freehold property?

    Comment


      #3
      1. (15.09.2009) RESTRICTION: No transfer of the registered estate by the proprietor of the registered estate is to be registered without a certificate signed by C1 or their conveyancer that the provisions of clause 13.6 of the Transfer dated 24 July 2009 referred to in the Charges Register have been complied with.

      Comment


        #4
        Please quote clause 13.6.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by laskoibence View Post
          1. (15.09.2009) RESTRICTION: No transfer of the registered estate by the proprietor of the registered estate is to be registered without a certificate signed by C1 or their conveyancer that the provisions of clause 13.6 of the Transfer dated 24 July 2009 referred to in the Charges Register have been complied with.
          If C1 no longer exists then it is impossible to comply with the restriction. Since that is the case an application should be made to cancel the restriction. If you supply evidence that C1 no longer exists I do not see how the application can be refused.

          If clause 13.6 requires a covenant to be entered into with C1 that is also something which is now impossible and should be drawn to the Land Registry's attention.

          Comment


            #6
            What does clause 13.6 say ?

            Perhaps you can apply to the Magistrates Court for the Judge to sign since C1 has been dissolved.

            Comment


              #7
              Strictly it does not matter what clause 13.6 says because the wording of the restriction is that a certificate is to be provided by a non-existent entity.

              Comment


                #8
                That is what I though, but LR is not agree with this, since they have contacted C1, C1 told them there is C2 who was dealing with the properties on the street. C2 says they are not allowed to sing the form since they are not on the title. LR can only dis apply the restrition, not remove it.

                Comment


                  #9
                  How did LR contact C1 if they do not exist?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                    How did LR contact C1 if they do not exist?
                    I have a contact to the old director, and they do as well.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by laskoibence View Post
                      I have a contact to the old director, and they do as well.
                      That should all be irrelevant. The director and company are two distinct entities. The company does not exist and there is no one to give consent. The restriction is a dead letter and should be removed. It seems like the matter has been dealt with at a low level at the LR. Make the points I have and ask for the position to be reviewed by a senior lawyer.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post

                        That should all be irrelevant. The director and company are two distinct entities. The company does not exist and there is no one to give consent. The restriction is a dead letter and should be removed. It seems like the matter has been dealt with at a low level at the LR. Make the points I have and ask for the position to be reviewed by a senior lawyer.
                        thanks, are You a solicitor? I am looking for an experienced one!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by laskoibence View Post

                          thanks, are You a solicitor? I am looking for an experienced one!
                          No, a retired legal executive.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Lawcruncher is the person who probably offers the most sensible and constructive advice on this web-site.

                            It is a matter of law that a Limited Company is a legal person completely separate from the people named as shareholders and directors when it was incorporated.

                            When a limited company is dissolved it ceases to exist.

                            Any requirement that a dissolved company has to release a restriction is then terminated as a matter of law.

                            Land Registry will have to acknowledge that.

                            There is no longer any legal person capable of meeting the requirement of the restriction, which is why it is now void.

                            There is legal authority regarding such matters, primarily when the release of a restrictive covenant required a written permission from a dissolved company.

                            No company means all requirements for approval are no longer valid.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              thank You for the help!

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              • overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by first timer 123
                                If an interest belonging at the time of the disposition to a person in actual occupation is an overriding interest, so far as regards to land of which he is in actual occupation.

                                As beneficial owner seller A makes a disposition to B, but at this time A remains in actual occupation of part...
                                14-05-2021, 16:58 PM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by first timer 123
                                Mr A owns a house and land. (The house and land you see in the photo)
                                Mr A sets up a trust which provides for Mrs A to have a life interest in that property/land.
                                On Mr A's death, the trustees become the owners of the property and Mrs A is the beneficial owner.
                                The property and land...
                                16-05-2021, 17:37 PM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by first timer 123
                                But that is what I am trying to say. It was picked up on by us and our solicitor and the transferors of our property shaded and signed the title plan. I can understand if this had never been picked up on but as I say it’s obvious to any reasonable person not to have been
                                16-05-2021, 10:59 AM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by Lawcruncher
                                The point here is that in most cases a title plan, whether on an old deed or at the Land Registry, is usually sufficient to identify the boundaries of land with reasonable certainty, though not with precision. There is therefore a tendency for conveyancers to assume, or at least take as a starting point,...
                                16-05-2021, 09:59 AM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by first timer 123
                                The plan you show whould be so very hard for any conveyancer or purchaser to pick up. I can't help but say this particular situation would be so very obvious to all involved. Even today conveyancers, solicitors etc say to check for anomolies. This anomaly would be blatantly obvious. Not only 100 years...
                                15-05-2021, 20:36 PM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by Lawcruncher
                                The following scenario explains how errors can occur.



                                The above show 2 houses 6 and 8. Forget the red and it shows the two houses as they were in 1900. It is how they appeared on the OS plan in that year. In 1920 John buys the two houses. He wants to live in 6 and let 8....
                                15-05-2021, 18:21 PM
                              • Access over estate road
                                by Swanny3542
                                Hello,
                                I currently live in a row of terrace houses, with a parking space behind my property. Access to the parking space is via a shared “estate road” which is referenced within the deeds of the property and each property within the row of houses.

                                The developer accidentally transferred...
                                15-05-2021, 13:21 PM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by first timer 123
                                What you say makes complete sense and I will come back to what you say, also with regards to what you see is what you get. You have answered so many of my many posts and questions and if you had been a solicitor, I can only imagine what the cost could have been!
                                From what I'm gathering it's your...
                                15-05-2021, 12:16 PM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by Lawcruncher
                                I will try and explain.

                                Back in feudal times barons were often fighting each other for land. A baron might go off on a crusade and return home to find that a neighbouring baron had taken advantage of his absence and taken over his land. He would literally have to fight to get it back. To...
                                15-05-2021, 09:44 AM
                              • Reply to overriding interests in actual occupation
                                by first timer 123
                                What I am failing to understand or make sense of is how occupation alone can simply change the title to another's property only because they do not occupy and someone else does.
                                For example I could sell a freehold property I own, which has a sitting tenant.
                                The new purchaser of my property...
                                15-05-2021, 00:25 AM
                              Working...
                              X