Complicated leases and mortgages

[BazzaS]

If you are unhappy with the set-up : don't rent there.

 

To me :

Either you are being too nosy as a tenant (all that should matter to you is your lease being lawfully issued by the freeholder, if it isn't a sub-let), or a previous reply hit the nail on the head : property law study coursework?

[BazzaS]

None of which actually denies you are a student, or studying law, or that it is your coursework : just that you say you aren't "a student who struggles with his coursework" - that could even mean you are in fact a student who struggles with HER coursework!, and you'd still be being truthful ....

 

After all in January you were talking about your educational institution ....

My educational institution is a charity incorporated by Royal Charter

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419412-I-have-been-refused-to-resit-an-examination&p=4671942#post4671942

[BazzaS]

I have found out the following about a property:

 

• There is a woman and a man living in this property.
  
• The woman is the only freehold of the property with no mortgagor
  
• According to the title register the ground floor is leased by two parties: one party is the woman and the other party is the woman and the man
  
• According to the title register the first floor is also leased by the two same parties. One party is the woman and the other party is the woman and the man.
  
• It is important to note that the ground floor and the first floor are leased separately with different Title Registry numbers at the land registry and with two different mortgagors
  
• The third floor is not leased
  
• So there are three title registers in the Land Registry for this property one for the entire property, one of the ground floor and one for the second floor.
  

I have the following questions concerning these complicated leases and mortgages

 

1. Why the woman and the man who are living together have not bought together this property instead of only her bought it without a mortgage and then leased two of the three floors to the man and to herself with two different mortgages?
   
2. Why the two parties to these two leases are one the woman only and the other both her and the man instead of one party being the woman and the other the man?
   
3. Why the ground floor and first floor have been leased separately instead of being lease together?
   
4. Why these people have chosen two different mortgagors one for the lease for the ground and another for the lease for the first floor instead of using the same mortgagor for the two leases?
   
5. Why the woman did not take any mortgage when she bought the house but took two mortgages one year later when she leased the ground and the first floor to herself and to the man?
   
6. I would like to understand these two complicated leases and I would like to know if maybe this property has been leased in this way to have less tax to pay or less interest in the two mortgages for another reason?
   

 

By an astounding coincidence, someone has posted exactly the same set of facts at :

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?68879-Can-this-property-be-a-single-dwelling-house&p=549647

 

But, there the question is "Can-this-property-be-a-single-dwelling-house", rather than an enquiry because they are considering renting ......

[BazzaS]

I posted a thread about my educational institution because it did not want me anymore as a student so I am not a student. Moreover I do not think that a teacher will give these kind of questions as coursework

I am entitled to rent like anyone else in this property even though maybe I will not do and at the same time I am entitled to query about or not it is a single dwelling house. However it is different matters it is why I posted two different threads. I have to compliment you for your investigation work. However it will be very nice to have a reply to my questions

 

It wasn't much "investigation work". Google, a memory for patterns, and pattern recognition sufficed.

 

If your educational institution "didn't want you as a student anymore", and "refused you a resit" : how does that sit with

 

"I am not a student who struggles with his coursework

 

What was the reason you left that institution then?

Has another now taken you?

[BazzaS]

I will maybe rent a room in this house or maybe not. Moreover I find this issue very interesting and I would like to understand it. Furthermore what is the more important is that there are threads in this forum which are interesting which anyone can enjoy

 

But, will you get your re-sit?

(How can you decide if you want to rent it or not while you claim you aren't a student who struggles with their studies, but your educational establishment has booted you out : surely you need to know what area you'll need to stay in before signing a lease?)

[BazzaS]

But the OP has told us why : because they might rent it.

 

Put aside your scepticism, as they have told us that twice : as if restating it makes it true.

But - Hang on! They have now said they can rent somewhere else, (no doubt with a landlord who is happy to have the details of their freehold & personal financials thoroughly forensically investigated....) so the OP is now asking purely for interest!, and would like to understand it, not for any other reason.

 

Me, I'm still waiting to understand how they can be "not struggling with their studies", yet failed an exam and were refused a re-sit........

[BazzaS]

I would maybe rent a house

 

 

Concerning this property which was previously a block of two flats there is a planning condition which says that a section 106 agreement is necessary and as a consequence a section 106 was signed which says that the occupiers of the ground floor flat cannot apply for a parking permit

 

Now this property has been amalgamated into one single dwelling. The question that I have is what has happened to the Section 106 agreement?

 

 

1.

The ground floor to which this Section 106 applies will not be anymore a separate residential unit does this means that this Section 106 does not apply anymore or that following this amalgamation this Section 106 applies to the entire property preventing any occupiers of this property from applying for a parking permit?

 

2.

Does this mean that this propriety could not be a single dwelling house because of this section 106 agreement because if it was a single dwelling house the occupiers of the first floor and of the second floor will be also occupiers of the ground floor? Hence occupiers of the ground floor will be able to apply for a parking permit what this Section 106 agreement prohibits

 

3.

This Section 106 agreement was not discharged when this property was amalgamated so it was still valid so can we say that for this reason this residential unit in the ground floor was still here and it could not have disappeared by being amalgamated and as a consequence this property is still a block of flats and could not be a single dwelling

 

4.

Does planning permission would have been necessary to amalgamate this property into a single dwelling house because of this planning condition and this Section 106 agreement and as a consequence the planning department was wrong to grant a lawful development certificate to amalgamate this property into a single dwelling without planning permission?

 

 

Is this your previous thread (which was closed) again?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448090-Complicated-leases-and-mortgages/page3

[BazzaS]

No this concern another property and another issue

 

Your life would no doubt be easier (and no one might again suggest that you were trying to get property law course questions answered!) if you found less complex lease properties?

[BazzaS]

I would like to rent a room in a property which is leased

The two parties of a lease agreement which is 999 years long are the lessor who is a man who is the freeholder of the property and the lessees who are this man himself and a woman.

 

There is something very strange in this lease agreement because there is only the signature of the man and of a witness but not this of the woman. Hence I would like to know if this lease agreement is legal and can be cancelled at any time by the Land Registry and how the woman can really be a lessee if she has not signed the lease agreement?

 

Same reply as at 12th July (apparently this is your third query regarding renting a property that has a complex problem associated with it, all for different properties).

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448986-What-happen-to-a-section-106-agreement-after-amalgamation-of-a-block-of-flats-into-a-single-dwelling&p=4762791#post476279

 

I suggested (for that 2nd, different property)

"Your life would no doubt be easier (and no one might again suggest that you were trying to get property law course questions answered!) if you found less complex lease properties?"

 

So, if you have found somewhere you have concerns about renting (this being the 3rd one, apparently) : move on, rent elsewhere, where you don't have concerns.

 

Other than that : go study for your property law course. Don't expect CAG to do your study for you

[BazzaS]

Property/Land law is one of the (six?) core subjects of a qualifying law degree; when I read for mine the recommended texts included, inter alia, Gray on Land Law. If you are interested in this area, it might be a good place to start.

 

Seven core areas required by the SRA / BSB, if I recall correctly.

Property / Land Law, Public law, EU law, Equity/Trusts, Contract Law, Criminal Law, and Tort.

 

OP : As for "why do I think this is coursework, because these aren't questions used" - These are precisely the APPLIED questions I would use to assess

1) Understanding of the underlying law

2) Ability to apply that law to a situation,

I'd also try to phrase the question to allow the candidate to express different options as to areas where the question doesn't give the whole facts.

 

So, "Given the stated facts, the basic law is A. The exception to the rule is B. The exception to the exception is C.

 

So, as the exception allowing B has arisen, the answer isn't A. if x, then B applies, but if y, then C."

Hence my doubts - it is precisely what could be asked in coursework.

 

Additionally, most renters wouldn't be concerned with such details, let alone notice them and post them as complex queries. To find them on one property : unusual.

To find them on 3 different properties, and still be considering any of them - what do you think that looks like?

[BazzaS]

 

Oddly, the poster who started the thread in March 2014 about being barred from his education institution started the thread posting as ‘id330uk’ but ended it by posting as ‘resources’. ‘resources’ and ‘id330uk’ seem to be concerned about similar things.

 

That makes me wonder whether ‘resources’ and ‘id330uk’ are the same person.

 

‘id330uk’ doesn’t have much luck either.

 

 

Whether ‘resources’ and ‘id330uk’ are one person or two, you can only wonder how so much ill fortune and litigation can attach to one person in such a short period of time.

 

Ohh, you are suspicious of their motives!

 

Funnily enough, so am I, (overly so, apparently, according to "resources").

 

I wondered if they were one and the same person, but felt their reply (back on the re-sit thread)

My educational institution is a charity incorporated by Royal Charter

wasn't conclusive - they might not have been saying "'resources' was refused a re-sit & booted out" but merely talking about "resources'" educational institution on "id330uk"'s thread .....

 

So I phrased a reply to "resources" but based only on the facts supplied by "id330uk", my post of 14:12, 30th June at

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448090-Complicated-leases-and-mortgages/page3

 

"Resources" didn't reply to it, confirming the suspicions - but nor did they reply saying "hey, that wasn't me, what are you talking about!" (Which you would expect if they hadn't been declined a re-sit).

Hence, my suspicion (shared with you) that they are one and the same remains.

 

Even if they aren't one and the same : suspicion that they are amongst the world's most unlucky people, or instead just looking for help with coursework, must remain.

[BazzaS]

BazzaS says

 

“Additionally, most renters wouldn't be concerned with such details, let alone notice them and post them as complex queries. To find them on one property : unusual.

To find them on 3 different properties, and still be considering any of them - what do you think that looks like?”

 

However my questions are not necessary complex. They are ‘in-depth questions’. The fact that BazzaS is not able to reply to them does not make them complex

 

True (regarding me not being able to reply), as I've never claimed such expertise.

But : what do you say is the difference between "complex" and "in depth"? You know, where properties have been split into flats on multiple floors, and you've gone and checked whose names are on title deeds, and whose signatures on paperwork ......

 

I am not more unlucky than someone else. Anyone knows that we live in a very litigious society and if we want to defend ourselves properly you know where it ends

 

I am waiting a reply to my last question.

 

Funny that : you keep having queries, that "aren't important as you no longer want to rent there" but none the less it still seems important to you to "get a reply"

(No doubt "purely for interest's sake" ; not because the coursework deadline is looming ......)

[BazzaS]

My last question is about another property that I will maybe rent.

 

Moreover which coursework deadline could be looming we are a the end of July?

 

 

How many properties are you looking to rent?

Are / were you "id330uk"?

 

As for course deadlines : I don't know for sure - which course are you on?

 

Most courses aren't running at the moment, EXCEPT for students needing extra help for re-sits,so you can't claim "can't be coursework as can't be a course in July".

[BazzaS]

What's the answer to my question resources? Have you also posted on CAG as id330uk ?

 

"Silence is golden", followed by "silver is muffled (at least when using duct tape as a gag!)"

 

Now we can add " silence from resources is 'avoiding the question'! "

[BazzaS]

There is something else strange in a property in which I will maybe rent a room

When this property was bought it was a block of two flats

 

His owner made a planning permission application to insert new windows with clear glasses which was granted to him but with a planning condition attached which says that the new windows should have obscured glasses due to overlooking. He did not implement this planning permission

 

Sometime later the owner of this property claimed to have amalgamated her block of flats into a single dwelling to be granted a lawful development certificate to insert new windows with clear glasses despite the planning condition which say that they should have obscure glasses.

 

However the question is how this block of flats could have really been amalgamated into a single dwelling if any of its two flats could be sold separately as flats at any time by one of the two mortgage lenders in the event of default on one of the two mortgages

 

Moreover no fixtures like kitchen and bathroom were removed. The only physical alteration was the removal of the panel of the door of the entrance of these two flats but without the removal of their frames. Hence the panels of these two doors could have been easily put back into their frames and as the bathroom and kitchen of these two flats were still here these two flats could have been sold as separate flat at any time by the mortgage company in case of default so how this property could have really been amalgamated into a single dwelling?

 

If it was not a single dwelling the lawful development certificate should be revoked and the previous planning condition which says that the windows should have obscure glasses enters into force and as a consequence these windows with clear glasses should be removed

I would like to be sure that if a rent a room with clear glasses in this property I will not end up with a room with obscure glasses

 

 

With all the properties you are looking at : the same answer as previously:

 

Find somewhere where you don't have concerns about the legal situation. If you discover legal concerns, don't rent there, move on.

[BazzaS]

Have to agree with this. Your contract is with the landlord so just concentrate on that and whether the property meets your needs. If the LL has issues with planning etc, that is for them to worry about, and if this leads to problems for you further down the line, worry about them then.

 

The OP is concerned about having to deal with these issues later.

Rather than "worry about them then." which leaves the OP with their question currently or later : just find somewhere without issues (current or incipient) - sorted!

 

No doubt this will leave the OP with their question, but they will at least then be asking "for interest sake" (as it has become academic). They may get an answer or may not, but at least their problem has already been solved.

[BazzaS]

These scenarios look like typical property law questions from the LPC.

 

You say LPC but are you sure that my English is enough to be a student in a LPC course?

 

Did they tell you that was the cause of your academic woes?

[BazzaS]

If my English was the cause of my possible academic woes would have I been accepted in the LPC course in the first place?

 

I don't believe an admissions team would allow someone to start a course when they knew they wouldn't pass : no institution wants to have a higher fail rate, as it makes it harder to attract students.

 

However, neither do the SRA allow the LPC to be an "attendance course", where you get to pass just by turning up.

 

So there has to be a middle ground of students who aren't "will sail through!" where they think "might well pass, got to give them a chance" or even "think they should be OK" (and then they turn out not to be).

Some people might look like they can manage their challenges : but then not actually deliver, first time.

 

So I don't think someone can say "no one who has ever failed their first attempt should / would have been let on the course in the first place".

[BazzaS]

“But how do the lease issues affect you as a tenant please? Are you just renting a room or is it a flat?”

I am looking to rent a self-contained room which could be a flat and it effects me because if this property was not a single dwelling when these windows were inserted the owner could be forced to remove them and I can end up with a room with windows with obscure glasses or with no windows at all. It is better to look for a room in July than in September so I should be sure that the room I chose will be ok.

As a matter of fact in case of default on payment of the mortgages this property could not be sold as a single dwelling because the mortgage lender of the lower flat will want to be paid its money back from the proceed of the sale of this lower flat and the mortgage lender of the upper flat will want to be paid its money back from the proceed of the sale of this upper flat. So it is possible that this property was not a single dwelling when these windows were inserted so my last question remained unanswered

 

So, don't rent there.

 

Why are you even considering properties you have identified concerns with?. Why give yourself that worry?.

 

If you identify a question that worries you, that is "complex" or "in-depth" (what is the difference, BTW?) , then say "not for me, thanks". Make the question academic.

 

Find somewhere else (given "it's easier in July than September")

[BazzaS]

They don't care - it's business, not education, per se. The LPC is typically taken at a law school (e.g. BPP, City, Kaplan etc.), not necessarily a university, and all law schools are businesses who want a profit. They take people with poor English and low grades (2:2) because they will pay - and paying means profits - they don't care if they churn out low standard passes as the LPC is worthless unless you have a training contract at the end of it. Only those with good academic grades will ever make the standard required to get a training contract - unless it's a high street ghetto practice, in which case those with lower grades may get in (I have seen some appallingly bad solicitors who barely speak English who are 'qualified').

 

 

I was aware that the supply of pupillages is far exceeded by the demand created by people completing BVTC, but wasn't aware it was an issue (to such a level) with LPC.

 

Sadly, your post makes good business sense : assuming the provider are using a "business", not "education" model.

 

If choosing an educational institution : one of the key factors I'd look at would be their pass rate. For a vocational course (which LPC is, from your description) : I'd then look for "gainful employment post course" rate and "success at getting a training contract" rates.

 

I can see how a candidate (refused / unlikely to be offered a place) by a school with more of an "education" ethos might go for an institution that says "don't worry, we'll take you!"

The institutions with more of a "take their money" ethos would then take more lower ability students, and end up with poorer results, getting a poor reputation, so their candidates struggle to get training contracts : would this not make perpetuating that cycle (poor results, poor reputation, poor employment outcomes, poor candidates, and repeat) more likely?

[BazzaS]

And are you sure that the information I am looking for can be found in books. If yes tell me which book and I will rush to read it

 

I'm not sure that the exact scenario (for all 3+ scenarios you have presented) will be described in any one book.

 

That is why the books represent "study" and "learning", rather than "answers to specific questions" : you get your answers but by obtaining the understanding you have claimed you desire - the answers follow from that.

 

Those with the knowledge & understanding (which excludes me, BTW) could "just give you your answers", but

a) then you would know but not necessarily understand, and

b) they'd have to want to give you the answers :Would you not agree that if you look like a law student wanting free coursework answers (regardless of if you are or aren't!) - the more you look like that, the less likely that gets.

[BazzaS]

You make reference to what I ‘look like’. However in this country we do not judge people on what they look like or on vague suspicions or gossips. We are innocent until proven guilty. Hence if someone has hard evidence that I lied by causing to believe that I am not a law student even if I am one I invite him to put forward his evidence

I think that my question relates more to practical knowledge than academic one. We can find a reply to by Googling but this has already been done or by personal experience and it is why I have posted this thread. I do not think that teachers are going to give questions as coursework that they are not able to reply themselves

I have the following additional questions concerning the same issue

1.

I have found in the following website

LINK TO COMMERCIAL SITE REMOVED - SS

“A leasehold house does not contain flats – it is a single dwelling”

 

This property is a leasehold block of flats and not a leasehold house. However a leasehold house does not contain flats. Hence how this leasehold block of flats could be a house i.e. a single dwelling?

2.

In the case of a leasehold block of flats each flat has its own lease. Hence does the fact that in this property each flat carries on having its own lease mean that it could not a single dwelling?

3.

Does this mean that in order that this property is a single dwelling the two leasehold concerning the two flats should have been merged into one leasehold i.e. a leasehold house?

 

You are indeed "innocent", as no-one will "prove you guilty".

However, if you want people to answer your questions, it is up to them if they want to answer or not.

If you "look guilty" (or even, just overly demanding or suspicious) : it makes it less likely you'll get a reply.

 

Is this latest set of questions "just for interest" or "yet another property I'm thinking of renting"?

[BazzaS]

It is about one of the properties that I would like to rent

 

Yet again : same reply (why do you not like this reply?)

 

If there are problems anticipated : Don't rent there.

Rent somewhere else where you have no concerns.

 

Sorted.

[BazzaS]

I am not a time waster. My thread raises an interested issue the proof is that no one has yet been able to reply my last question

 

I think it is more likely "the experts don't feel like wasting their time", rather than "not able"

 

I advice you rather to concentrate on my question it could be useful not only to me but also to plenty other people

 

When they actually need help for a real world problem, they can always post asking for help.

 

I do not think that teachers are going to give questions as coursework that they are not able to reply themselves

 

How do you know what the tutors are or aren't able to answer?