>> I tried to use one solicitor for us both but they wouldn't play - >> 'conflict of interest'...
>I can see that problem as they are treating the "sale" as a normal >conveyance but this isn't it's an asset swap. Agree on values, swap the >ownership details on the Land Registry and transfer a balance (if any) in >the appropriate direction. Mortgage companies might not like it and will >want valuation surveys but at the end of the day there is still an asset >protecting the loan.
And, as it's a simple transaction with no contentious issues, sack the
solicitors and do it yourself. The Land registry site is very clear,
has all the forms available for download and the staff are very
helpful. (After all, the original intention of the Land Registry was
to make property transfers simple and remove lawyers from the
process.)
>> Only potential issue is that her house was originally bought with FiL - >> who is no longer with us. She has death certificate and will etc >> however.
>That is what I was thinking. If the Will was drawn up correctly there >shouldn't be any problems.
If the house was held as a beneficial joint tenancy, ownership will
transfer to the surviving partner automatically; a will is irrelevant.
The LR will need to see the death certificate on transfer though.
>> Both solicitors insist on 'normal' sell/buy transaction, with fees for
>> each. No doubt full sum of money will go both ways, as is tradition.
>I think you need to find another solicitor that doesn't want to treat the >process as two "house sales" just an asset swap. When my sister and I >"sold" our 1/3 shares in my late fathers house to our other sister we >just used one solicitor and didn't bother with the bureaucracy(*) that >surrounds an ordinary house sale.
>(*) The only thing I can think of that *has* to be done is changing the >names on the Land Registry and thinking of a figure to give them for the >value, which might lead to avoiding/reducing Stamp Duty.
Solicitors have just managed to make the sale of my parents house fall
through after 4 months of serial incompetence, by trying to insist on
first registration of the property before transfer. A completely
unneccesary step, but one that would have got them an extra 500 in
fees.
The first registration has now been done by us. It's a very simple
process which took about half an hour to fill in the forms. They were
at the Land Registry less than 24 hours after they were recovered from
the solicitor and given a brief examination by a very helpful person
who confirmed my views that the issues that the solicitors were
raising as problems were complete non-issues.
> On Nov 12, 3:33 pm, AlanD wrote:
>>> It looks as if you may need to provide an EPC when a property is sold,
>>> even if it's done privately, in which case both properties would need
>>> one.
>> Ok, if I get asked for one will arrange that.
>> Any idea of the cost to expect?
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:48:44 +0100, AlanD wrote:
>> We have a mortgage, she doesn't.
>> As far as I know the solicitors haven't spoken to each other yet, so I
>> think it's unlikely our mortgage co is insisting on it.
>> They did want a valuation survey, which was done last week.
> This a private sale, do what you want not what the conveyancing solictors
> try to insist that you need. Both of you are aware of the properties and
> their short comings, if any. There is no need for searches, certificates
> etc. The only thing to check is that either of you are actually legaly
> allowed to sell. Is MiLs house actually in her name and not FiLs...
> You don't need two solictors either, just one to make sure the Land
> Registry forms and other legal stuff is all done properly/correctly.
Solicitors are no longer allowed to act for both parties.
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:58:25 +0000, Bill Taylor <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
>Solicitors have just managed to make the sale of my parents house fall
>through after 4 months of serial incompetence, by trying to insist on
>first registration of the property before transfer. A completely
>unneccesary step, but one that would have got them an extra 500 in
>fees.
>The first registration has now been done by us. It's a very simple
>process which took about half an hour to fill in the forms. They were
>at the Land Registry less than 24 hours after they were recovered from
>the solicitor and given a brief examination by a very helpful person
>who confirmed my views that the issues that the solicitors were
>raising as problems were complete non-issues.
Doesn't voluntary registration involve the same* scale of fees that rise
according to the value of the property (not the value of a transaction) so that
registering a house that hasn't existed on the register can cost many hundreds
of pounds whereas doing nothing (other than keeping the deeds secure) and
letting it get registered when it needs to be, with the costs falling on the
purchaser, make a far better solution?
* They offer somthing like 75 quid discount iirc for voluntary registration.
A.Lee wrote:
> David WE Roberts <nos...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > "Since the amendments to the wiring regulations in 2008 many homes
> > fixed wiring installations now do not comply with the current
> > regulations. The requirement for Periodic Inspection Reports
> > (PIR's) have continued to develop with legislation that now
> > requires that every home for sale in the UK Requires the home owner
> > to declare when the property was last electrically tested and with
> > let properties requiring a periodic inspection report also, any
> > potential buyer or tenant may try to haggle and renegotiate prices
> > with you, if they even put any offer in at all!"
> > which reads like semi-literate scaremongering to me but doesn't
> > mention that a report is mandatory.
> It is bollocks. Houses being sold need no certification of their
> electrical installation, and rented houses do not need to have a
> 'PIR', well, they couldnt have one anyway, as there is no such thing
> as a PIR now, it is an Electrical Installation Condition Report.
> To the OP, unless the mortgage company require a report, dont bother.
> 60 will get you FA of a report. It will be a quick look at the
> fusebox/CU, possibly bonding, and a quick look at the socket outlets.
> Nothing other than a visual 'inspection'. Utter waste of time and
> money. To their discredit, NICEIC actually supply forms to fill in
> for a Visual Inspection Report.
> It is money for nothing, and tells you nothing about the safety of the
> installation.
About the only time a VIR is of any use is when you have a valid EICR and there is a change of tenant.
On Monday, 12 November 2012 20:09:28 UTC, Tim Watts wrote:
> I am almost certain it only applies to houses being marketed.
Not IMHE. We bought in late 2008, without the house having been marketed. We still needed to pay for an EPC, but not a HIP. (The issue of who paid is another matter...).
As the house is 125 years old, the EPC gave it a uniform zilch rating for everything. Which was no surprise to anyone. Total waste of time and money.
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:08:07 +0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
>> You don't need two solictors either, just one to make sure the Land
>> Registry forms and other legal stuff is all done properly/correctly.
> Solicitors are no longer allowed to act for both parties.
But this is an "asset swap" not a full marketed house conveyance sale between complete strangers. It's a mostly paperwork excercise and the only reason to have a solictor involved is to (hopefully!) make sure the legal paperwork is done correctly. It's not rocket science but silly mistakes can be very expensive further down the line.
