£10k BILL IS THIS FRAUD
Discussion
In real need of some good advice here, we purchased our new home in Febuary this year a loverly cottage with with 14 acres of land, when we were perusing the purchase the solicitors searches and the selling vendors confirmed that the place had flooded back in 2007 when we had the big floods in this area i.e., Tewkesbury got hit bad along with surrounding areas, The selling vendors also confirmed the bund around the cottage had been constructed to stop it flooding in the future, ok we gave it some thought and decided to purchase.... now 9 months later we have received a letter that the previous owners obtained a grant for £10k from the local district council and the grant is due for repayment upon change of ownership of the property,
basically if the previous owners ever sell the grant must be repaid, This was never mentioned by the selling vendors and our solicitors searches and we paid extra and had two done never picked up on this, But along with the recent shocker letter from the district council says we have records that searches were carried out but no request was made of a legislation search, I have spoken in depth to my solicitor who says there was 100% no evidence that a legislation search was necessary or needed and no evidence from the previous searches picked up on anything untoward , so we now have 2 weeks to pay back the £10k grant as the grant was agreed with a charge on the property regardless of owner, our solicitor who has practiced in this field for over 20 years has never heard of this scenario before i,m in need of some decent legal advice here of where and how to fight this if anyone can help ?????
basically if the previous owners ever sell the grant must be repaid, This was never mentioned by the selling vendors and our solicitors searches and we paid extra and had two done never picked up on this, But along with the recent shocker letter from the district council says we have records that searches were carried out but no request was made of a legislation search, I have spoken in depth to my solicitor who says there was 100% no evidence that a legislation search was necessary or needed and no evidence from the previous searches picked up on anything untoward , so we now have 2 weeks to pay back the £10k grant as the grant was agreed with a charge on the property regardless of owner, our solicitor who has practiced in this field for over 20 years has never heard of this scenario before i,m in need of some decent legal advice here of where and how to fight this if anyone can help ?????
ncjones said:
If it was a charge on the property, the sellers solicitor should have deducted it from the sale proceeds before sending the balance to their client.
This has been discussed and looks like we might have something here thats if the vendors informed there solicitor it almost looks like it was hidden away ....ncjones said:
It’ll all sounds really odd. They wouldn’t be able to hide a charge, so I suspect the council didn’t have one. It’s probably a grant agreement, but you’re not a party to that so wouldn’t be liable.
Most property level protection conditions related to house sales, are ensuring the protection is left in place for the new owner, not anything requiring repayment.
You need copies of the agreement / charge and get a second legal opinion if necessary.
Thank you i agree and this opinion has been emailed to my solicitor earlier today and awaiting a response....Most property level protection conditions related to house sales, are ensuring the protection is left in place for the new owner, not anything requiring repayment.
You need copies of the agreement / charge and get a second legal opinion if necessary.
poo at Paul's said:
Common sense would suggest that such an agreement would be between the people requesting the grant, and the people offering the grant. Inn which case, surely it is the sellers who must pay such a demand?
I have heard of such demands being made for such things as solar panel arrays, offered free to the owner, but payable if they sell the house, and even things like ground / air source heating systems.
You clearly need to get a look at the original grant documents showing the terms etc, so contact the council and the previous sellers / owners would be where I would begin.
Again thanks for your time and input we are on to it, and its looking like there are various ways to fight this not to sure as to which at the moment...I have heard of such demands being made for such things as solar panel arrays, offered free to the owner, but payable if they sell the house, and even things like ground / air source heating systems.
You clearly need to get a look at the original grant documents showing the terms etc, so contact the council and the previous sellers / owners would be where I would begin.
Believe me it has been confirmed it is no con it came from WYRE FOREST DISTRICT COUNCILS PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER
i agree the whole thing stinks i,m awaiting my solicitors plan of attack and i have also had contact from someone in the legal profession interested in taking it on Thanks again will keep post updated
i agree the whole thing stinks i,m awaiting my solicitors plan of attack and i have also had contact from someone in the legal profession interested in taking it on Thanks again will keep post updated
SantaBarbara said:
Turbo, Was the letter correctly addressed to you or to the previous residents?
yes addressed to us but the original agreement addressed to the selling vendors, also we have a copy of the LAW SOCIETY PROPERTY INFORMATION FORM which the seller completed and signed,Iitem 2.2 is the seller aware of anything which might lead to a dispute about the property nearby if yes give details she chose no as a answer, Item 3.1 Have any notices or correspondence been received or sent (e.g. from a neighbour, council or government department ), or any negotiations or discussions taken place, which affect the property or a property nearby?,if yes ,please give details she again chose no as a answer !!!!!!!Rude-boy said:
Questions to ask your solicitor:-
1. Why do they do Personal Locals, and not get official ones?
2. What was the Seller's reply to enquiries 3.1, 4.1, 7.1, 8.1 (especially) 8.5 and 10.1 of Form TA6. All of these, and specifically 8.5 would have given scope to mention the grant and some also the fact that the bund had to be built in the first place.
Thanks for this she basically answered no to all apart from 4.1she answered yes and made a small note (stream and pool moved away from house and a bund put in place to protect from flooding) 7.1 she answered yes again with comment work carried out to prevent flooding again,8.5 yes again comment rents the field to farmer for cows, its all looking like she has committed fraud ???1. Why do they do Personal Locals, and not get official ones?
2. What was the Seller's reply to enquiries 3.1, 4.1, 7.1, 8.1 (especially) 8.5 and 10.1 of Form TA6. All of these, and specifically 8.5 would have given scope to mention the grant and some also the fact that the bund had to be built in the first place.
InitialDave said:
Your posts are unhelpful, you rarely give the impression of paying the slightest attention to the rest of a thread's content - or being able to understand it if you did - and overall, you are just an annoyance wherever you spring up across the forum.
OP: I might have missed it, but have you contacted the supposed source of the letter to confirm they sent it?
Hi No but i had a friendly local councillor look into it and confirm OP: I might have missed it, but have you contacted the supposed source of the letter to confirm they sent it?
nikaiyo2 said:
The TR1 or 2 asks if the seller is transferring full title or limited title, surely if the property has charges held over it then full transfer is not possible?
I agree towards the bottom of first page of the paperwork (was going to call it a contract) it states THE COST OF WORKS IS SET AS A LOCAL LAND CHARGE UPON THE PROPERTY my financial adviser is saying as we have a mortgage on this property there is no way the BS would have given us a mortgage if anyone had a charge on the property, so its getting more complicated.... Wiccan of Darkness said:
I saw this last night and wrote a reply, and got logged out when I hit submit 
The charge was made against the previous occupant and should have been declared during conveyancing, so to answer your first question then yes, your solicitor should be writing to the previous occupants as it was their responsibility to inform you, or have the charge repaid.
This is akin to chancel liability, but much more recently, so if the previous occupants were in the house at the time, they knew about the charge and failed to declare.
After 2007, the value of their property plummeted and became unsaleable as a result, so they have benefited financially from the bunds by having a house they could sell. Your position is that you've paid full whack for the property as a result, and not had £100,000 knocked off the purchase price. Clearly the previous occupants paid the £6000 for the works, they didn't have much choice. The £10k was payable on the sale of the house. It doesn't say who pays, though. The vendors might well argue it was factored in to the sale price of the property.
There is a complication though and that is where a water course crosses the bunds, via a sluice gate and a pump system. You will see the evidence in the form of large green metal tubes arching over the bunds. Environment agency manage the gates, and they have been known to fail. They did in Kempsey just up the road from you.
Any local conveyancing firm would have known about these charges, it's not common knowledge but its there all the same, so someone was not on the ball. Your solicitor should chase this up on your behalf, as if the previous occupants have stated it was settled they may not have seen fit to even do a search. They should have done so, anyway.
The flooding aspect is normal around here, hence why any local conveyancing firm would have known about the scheme. IIRC there was a lot of hoo-hah when the bunds were built as to who pays for it. Naturally those affected stood to lose a lot (well, everything, frankly) but those who were not, felt that these people had taken the gamble and lost and shouldn't have to bail them out. Everyone coped by adapting their properties; the ones who didn't had to deal with it. There's no sympathy for ruined axminsters any more.
Whilst not chancel liability, this is along the same lines and building insurance often has a chancel liability clause added so in the event of liability you can claim on buildings insurance. This is another avenue you can check, just in case it gets that far. But by then I'd have got compensated by the conveyancing firm and sued the previous occupants for failure to disclose.
When you or your solicitor contact the council, you need to ask if the bund is a designated flood risk protection asset (or similar wording) which essentially means the bund is the responsibility of the property owner, ie you. It will be registered as a local land charge. My gut feeling is if conveyancing didn't uncover the grant listed against the property, they won't have uncovered any local land charges, either. That's if they even did a search.
And lastly, welcome to the area, I hope you're settling in. One thing I will say is the bunds are not 100% efficient, so get flood ready. Any modifications to the house should have flooding in mind, eg flag stone floors, external rendering used for internal plastering, plug sockets half way up the wall, etc.
wicked reply !!!,The charge was made against the previous occupant and should have been declared during conveyancing, so to answer your first question then yes, your solicitor should be writing to the previous occupants as it was their responsibility to inform you, or have the charge repaid.
This is akin to chancel liability, but much more recently, so if the previous occupants were in the house at the time, they knew about the charge and failed to declare.
After 2007, the value of their property plummeted and became unsaleable as a result, so they have benefited financially from the bunds by having a house they could sell. Your position is that you've paid full whack for the property as a result, and not had £100,000 knocked off the purchase price. Clearly the previous occupants paid the £6000 for the works, they didn't have much choice. The £10k was payable on the sale of the house. It doesn't say who pays, though. The vendors might well argue it was factored in to the sale price of the property.
There is a complication though and that is where a water course crosses the bunds, via a sluice gate and a pump system. You will see the evidence in the form of large green metal tubes arching over the bunds. Environment agency manage the gates, and they have been known to fail. They did in Kempsey just up the road from you.
Any local conveyancing firm would have known about these charges, it's not common knowledge but its there all the same, so someone was not on the ball. Your solicitor should chase this up on your behalf, as if the previous occupants have stated it was settled they may not have seen fit to even do a search. They should have done so, anyway.
The flooding aspect is normal around here, hence why any local conveyancing firm would have known about the scheme. IIRC there was a lot of hoo-hah when the bunds were built as to who pays for it. Naturally those affected stood to lose a lot (well, everything, frankly) but those who were not, felt that these people had taken the gamble and lost and shouldn't have to bail them out. Everyone coped by adapting their properties; the ones who didn't had to deal with it. There's no sympathy for ruined axminsters any more.
Whilst not chancel liability, this is along the same lines and building insurance often has a chancel liability clause added so in the event of liability you can claim on buildings insurance. This is another avenue you can check, just in case it gets that far. But by then I'd have got compensated by the conveyancing firm and sued the previous occupants for failure to disclose.
When you or your solicitor contact the council, you need to ask if the bund is a designated flood risk protection asset (or similar wording) which essentially means the bund is the responsibility of the property owner, ie you. It will be registered as a local land charge. My gut feeling is if conveyancing didn't uncover the grant listed against the property, they won't have uncovered any local land charges, either. That's if they even did a search.
And lastly, welcome to the area, I hope you're settling in. One thing I will say is the bunds are not 100% efficient, so get flood ready. Any modifications to the house should have flooding in mind, eg flag stone floors, external rendering used for internal plastering, plug sockets half way up the wall, etc.
the previous occupants were 100% in the house both when it flooded and when the bund construction where carried out, i don't think when this place flooded it was the norm as we have lived in the area most our lives to our and other locals knowledge it was a one off some 9-10 years ago when we had the great severn flood due to constant rain remember it well took 8 hours to get home instead of the 40 min commute ...also there are no pipeworks or sluice gates on our property, thanks for your valued advice .....
Thanks guys, the b.........s knew exactly wot they were up to we have had endless issues where when we viewed the property various times the outcome becoming the new owners didn't match up to what the vendors had told us THE BIG LESSON HERE IS BUYER BEWARE BECAUSE WHATEVER THE PROBLEM YOU WILL END UP WEARING IT !!! however were happy beside all the s
t we have uncovered Thanks again !!!!!!
t we have uncovered Thanks again !!!!!!This is unbelievable,
3 years later and we have decided to sell our property wee were expected to exchange contracts last Friday when I got a call from my solicitors secretary saying we can not exchange today as the land charge is still registered on the property, I called the WFDC to request it to be removed and eventually to find out that the previous owners had never payed the £10k grant back to the council they had agreed to but didn't and where never chased to do so,
I,m now in a position for desperate advice as if I pay the £10k the charge will beee removed if I don't it won't, we are moving into our new property next Friday so I have to clear this up quickly, due to covid restrictions and working from home correspondence with my solicitor is awkward at the best of times which isn't helping, Also back tracking to when we purchased the property and the land charge didn't come to light in all of our searches, our building society search, the sellers solicitors search etc, I believe it had never been registered the correct way and was hidden away in some perhaps paper folder and only come to light when we had a visit from the water/council as we had been reported for stopping the flow of the brook, which we didn't it turned out to be the farmer below our property but I believe this is when the old 2008 folder got bought out the closet and the charge come to light ?, as we had the original letter asking for payment a few days after the visit,
if anyone can offer advice would come much appreciated .....
3 years later and we have decided to sell our property wee were expected to exchange contracts last Friday when I got a call from my solicitors secretary saying we can not exchange today as the land charge is still registered on the property, I called the WFDC to request it to be removed and eventually to find out that the previous owners had never payed the £10k grant back to the council they had agreed to but didn't and where never chased to do so,
I,m now in a position for desperate advice as if I pay the £10k the charge will beee removed if I don't it won't, we are moving into our new property next Friday so I have to clear this up quickly, due to covid restrictions and working from home correspondence with my solicitor is awkward at the best of times which isn't helping, Also back tracking to when we purchased the property and the land charge didn't come to light in all of our searches, our building society search, the sellers solicitors search etc, I believe it had never been registered the correct way and was hidden away in some perhaps paper folder and only come to light when we had a visit from the water/council as we had been reported for stopping the flow of the brook, which we didn't it turned out to be the farmer below our property but I believe this is when the old 2008 folder got bought out the closet and the charge come to light ?, as we had the original letter asking for payment a few days after the visit,
if anyone can offer advice would come much appreciated .....
I had a email 3 years ago forwarded on to me by my solicitor stating that the previous owners had agreed to pay the outstanding charge and yes I took this as it was sorted life got in the way and I never badgered anyone to confirm this, the council never chased or got back in touch so I genuinely presumed it was cleared, I do agreee my solicitor should have chased it so he could close this off but I strongly disagree that some opinions blame me,
my solicitor was unaware this charge ever existed so was the original sellers solicitor, so was our mortgage lender, so were we, I see it as blatant fraud from the previous owners the council have contacted them recently and they responded in saying wee can't afford it now but we have property for sale if that sells we will pay it and as far as I know the council have accepted this......
my solicitor was unaware this charge ever existed so was the original sellers solicitor, so was our mortgage lender, so were we, I see it as blatant fraud from the previous owners the council have contacted them recently and they responded in saying wee can't afford it now but we have property for sale if that sells we will pay it and as far as I know the council have accepted this......
it couldn't be picked up as it was never registered as per earlier in the thread, It looks to be have been created with seriously out dated paper work and only come to light when someone happened to find it in the original file for the original application/flood defence works,
Also from advice earlier in the thread its possible that this was all done using very old government legislation which i would like to think isn't worth the paper its written on but trying to get the local council to accept this is proving difficult, Maybe someone at the local council has cocked up big time and now they've decided to run and hide...
Also from advice earlier in the thread its possible that this was all done using very old government legislation which i would like to think isn't worth the paper its written on but trying to get the local council to accept this is proving difficult, Maybe someone at the local council has cocked up big time and now they've decided to run and hide...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff