Purchasing A Property With Sitting Tenants

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

    #16
    This is one of the most famous judgments ever utter in an English of law

    This case concerned the forcible detention of a man being made to work!

    No man in this kingdom shall be subjected to the will of another without their express consent and agreement. For, any man who walks this land we call England and breaths the air, breaths that air as a free man. Moreover, if this court were to decide otherwise, it would strike a mortal blow to the very sole of our nationhood and deprive our constitution of its vitality, rendering us all to become, nothing more than slaves subjected to the will of the state. I therefore have no hesitation in ordering this man’s release to freely walk among us forthwith

    Conclusion freedom of contract is held by the courts to be almost sacrosanct.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by bill65 View Post
      This is one of the most famous judgments ever utter in an English of law

      This case concerned the forcible detention of a man being made to work!

      No man in this kingdom shall be subjected to the will of another without their express consent and agreement. For, any man who walks this land we call England and breaths the air, breaths that air as a free man. Moreover, if this court were to decide otherwise, it would strike a mortal blow to the very sole of our nationhood and deprive our constitution of its vitality, rendering us all to become, nothing more than slaves subjected to the will of the state. I therefore have no hesitation in ordering this man’s release to freely walk among us forthwith

      Conclusion freedom of contract is held by the courts to be almost sacrosanct.
      Wrong again. Man in question entered into contract voluntarily, didn't he?
      By whom was he coercively subjected to anything? He had freedom of contract- hence he's bound and can't spontaneously change his mind.
      JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
      1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
      2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
      3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
      4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

      Comment


        #18
        What I think you are all missing, is this is the purchase of a reversion interest which some time in the future the land will revert to the reversioner. Your not purchasing land per se but the right to it. Your are not taking actual possession of the land, the only way you can do that is to be in possession of the rent. And if the tenant refuses to pay!

        A little history

        1)All land is owned by the crown.

        2)When a landlord lets and the tenant takes for a rent service, both are bonded to the crown,( the crown being a symbol of god's will this was known as a holy union and held to be sacrosanct.) The crown is always a party to a contract in land.

        3)As rent is a service, it can never be a debt therefore it cannot be assigned( letter of authority rebutted).

        4)Once the contract is entered into this contract has a life of it's own.( holy union, it must be blessed by agreement)

        5) Rent issues from the land through the tenant ( no tenant no rent) owned by the tenant and rendered to the landlord by way of service (rent).

        6)Therefore when purchasing a reversion interest make absolutely certain that you take a legal right to demand that service. And the only way you can do that is by prior agreement. Otherwise you will have a land certificate resting at H.M land registry and nothing more.( name changed in 12 years)

        7)Now what I think your are missing, the crown is saying under S.2 1989 L.P.A unless you have something reduced to writing ( all the material terms of the contract must be reduced to writing) and signed, this court will not assist you. In other words if you cannot get into court all the laws in the world will be of little assistant to you.

        8)Please fill free to chastise my thinking!

        Comment


          #19
          All very interesting but doesn't change my answer.

          You cannot easily get adverse possession of land these days, you have to let the owner know that you will be applying and of course, they will not allow you to do so once they know about it. Human Rights Act

          Comment


            #20
            1. Yes.
            2. No. Crown is not party.
            3. Rent can be a debt. See Limitation Act 1980, for instance.
            4. Meaningless.
            5. No. What you mean is "No letting=no rent".
            6. Land Certificates abolished over three years ago. What "name changed"?
            7. No. Contract=lease=existing network of obligations. Section 2 of LPA 1989 simply formalised (with changes) procedure for creating contract re land, replacing s.40 of LPA 1925. Nothing to do with rent or leases.
            8. Consider yourself chastised. Don't do it again.
            JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
            1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
            2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
            3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
            4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

            Comment


              #21
              Jeffrey don't take what i do personally my interest is in the law only, and assisting people with it. There is noting I enjoy more than legal argument.

              The man was a slave hardly working with consent. You can't force a man to do service to another.

              I can assure you a personal service( which is what a rent service is) cannot be a debt .If i contract for a surgeon to operate on me and he assigns that contract to another I'm quit with in my rights not to pay him. I will very much argue this.

              If the tenant refuses to pay the new landlord what then?

              Regards Bill

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by attilathelandlord View Post
                All very interesting but doesn't change my answer.

                You cannot easily get adverse possession of land these days, you have to let the owner know that you will be applying and of course, they will not allow you to do so once they know about it. Human Rights Act
                I was not trying to change your answer.As i said i enjoy legal debate.What happens if you can't find the person?

                Comment


                  #23
                  I'm dealing with a matter at the moment concerning this very question (2) That the crown is a party to the contract how else can it pass law to deal with it. The matter I'm dealing with, is with rent restricting .I'm saying the rent officer is representing the crown through the secretary of state, when restricting rent. In other words the crown has become active within the contract.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by bill65 View Post
                    I'm dealing with a matter at the moment concerning this very question (2) That the crown is a party to the contract how else can it pass law to deal with it. The matter I'm dealing with, is with rent restricting .I'm saying the rent officer is representing the crown through the secretary of state, when restricting rent. In other words the crown has become active within the contract.
                    No again. Do you not understand contract law? Only parties can take benefits(except where they contemplate- or statute specifies- otherwise). Only parties can be burdened too. Rent Officer is a creation of statute; rent restriction procedure is as well. The Crown is therefore not "active within the contract"; whatever made you think that it was?
                    JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                    1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                    2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                    3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                    4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Where did the statue come from and how's seal is on that statue. Your mind seems closed to reason and argument something I'm not used to. Do you understand the significance of a seal. The crown created this officer to represent it i.e to make decision on it's behalf.

                      The crux of this debate and remember it is only by way of debate,(it was not my intention to take the debate to this level) that this is the purchase of an investment with people in it, the tenancy already exists therefore we are discussing the transfer of a service. I will argue that you cannot force a man to do service to another without their consent.

                      Here is my definition of a contract:
                      A contract has no live of its own, it is born of agreement between the parties thereto and given vitality by their desires to a strike a bargain, fertilized by negotiating, once value has been agreed and the consideration moves from the promise that bargain becomes a contract imbued with the promises of the parties thereto and cloaked with the sanctity of the law. And the law will secure them in the enjoyment of it, and will not tolerate any interference with it, save only by way of lawful authority.

                      Remember jeffrey that there are people reading and this discussion might go above their heads.

                      Regards Bill

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Not gone over mine..very interesting - carry on!
                        Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by islandgirl View Post
                          Not gone over mine..very interesting - carry on!
                          No- life's too short. Let's live in real world and not dwell on theory.
                          JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                          1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                          2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                          3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                          4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                          Comment


                            #28
                            The performance of service.

                            The law has grown out of that most basic treat of the human condition namely, peoples need to have certainty in there lives, just read the posts on this forum.

                            The law as an abstract concept, exists only in so far as it can be enforced.

                            Whilst homage has been abolished that of fealty( act in a tenant like manner) has not, and it is implied into all contracts in relation to land.

                            An oath of fealty, from the Latin fidelitas or faithfulness, is a pledge of allegiance of one person to another. Typically the oath is made upon a religious object such as a Bible or saint's relic thus binding the oath taker before God.( the crown is a symbol of god's will) This is why such contracts were known as holy unions .
                            1.Fidelity to one's lord; the feudal obligation by which the tenant or vassal was bound to be faithful to his lord.
                            2. The oath by which this obligation was assumed.
                            3. Fidelity; allegiance; faithfulness.

                            As I said you cannot force a man to do service to another,that is why I set up S.40 by way of a defense. I have always been of the opinion that the tenant should have the right to interview the prospective landlord, and decide if they are a fit and proper person to be so.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by bill65 View Post
                              An oath of fealty, from the Latin fidelitas or faithfulness, is a pledge of allegiance of one person to another. Typically the oath is made upon a religious object such as a Bible or saint's relic thus binding the oath taker before God.( the crown is a symbol of god's will) This is why such contracts were known as holy unions .
                              1.Fidelity to one's lord; the feudal obligation by which the tenant or vassal was bound to be faithful to his lord.
                              2. The oath by which this obligation was assumed.
                              3. Fidelity; allegiance; faithfulness.
                              Well as it happens I'm signing up a new tenant today - so when I'm explaining his obligations I'll run this little lot past him, eh...?

                              Comment


                                #30
                                no need it's implied! LoL

                                Don't forget this work's both ways, the tenant is agreeing to go under your protection in return for rendering a personal service to you (rent service).
                                Last edited by bill65; 05-02-2007, 08:12 AM.

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X