i dont own the site my house is on

butt1

hi,hope some ones being down this road before me,my home is build 3yrs,on my dads land,he promised me the site,we have a 200k mortgage,in my wifes name,the mortgage company are know putting pressure on our solicitor to get him to sign the site over,he wont,the solicitor has given the mortgage company a undertaken that the site would be coming into my wifes name,so the solicitor was on about how his insurance would go up?,can anyone through any lite on this,we are afraid we will loose our home,what are our options,where will this endup,court?

Indricotherium

butt1 wrote: »

hi,hope some ones being down this road before me,my home is build 3yrs,on my dads land,he promised me the site,we have a 200k mortgage,in my wifes name,the mortgage company are know putting pressure on our solicitor to get him to sign the site over,he wont,the solicitor has given the mortgage company a undertaken that the site would be coming into my wifes name,so the solicitor was on about how his insurance would go up?,can anyone through any lite on this,we are afraid we will loose our home,what are our options,where will this endup,court?

Did your father give an undertaking to the solicitor that he would be putting the land in your name? And is he now refusing to do so?

butt1

Indricotherium wrote: »

Did your father give an undertaking to the solicitor that he would be putting the land in your name? And is he now refusing to do so?

no,he didnt,i did,w e thought he would sign the site over as promised,,but because of family situations,he know refuses,he doesnt want it goin in my wifes name

Indricotherium

butt1 wrote: »

Indricotherium wrote: »

Did your father give an undertaking to the solicitor that he would be putting the land in your name? And is he now refusing to do so?

no,he didnt,i did,w e thought he would sign the site over as promised,,but because of family situations,he know refuses,he doesnt want it goin in my wifes name

Sounds like the solicitor went on a bit of a solo run giving that undertaking to the bank if he hadn't got any indication from your father that he was going to give you the land.

IMO I should add.

beeftotheheels

butt1 wrote: »

no,he didnt,i did,w e thought he would sign the site over as promised,,but because of family situations,he know refuses,he doesnt want it goin in my wifes name

Talk to a lawyer - a new one since you may have conflicted the old one.

Milk & Honey

It is the solicitor's problem. You should not worry too much about it.

beeftotheheels

Milk & Honey wrote: »

It is the solicitor's problem. You should not worry too much about it.

While the solicitor has a problem, the OP potentially does too.

Would the bank have lent money against a property to which they couldn't get good title?

butt1

beeftotheheels wrote: »

While the solicitor has a problem, the OP potentially does too.

Would the bank have lent money against a property to which they couldn't get good title?

sorry what does op mean? other person?

beeftotheheels

butt1 wrote: »

sorry what does op mean? other person?

The original poster i.e. you.

Condatis

Situations where title to a house and the land on which it is built where affected by ACRA campaigns in the 1960s and 70s. Where there were separate titles Ground Rent was usually payable by the owner of the house.

Legislation gave house owners the right to buy out the ground rent according to a specified schedule based on the amount of the ground rent. The creation of new ground rents was prohibited.

It is therefore possible that your title to the house in not recorded with the Land Registry as such registration relates to primarily to the land. From what you say it is likely that the land is still registered to your father.

That is why the mortgager is concerned as they do not unencumbered title, despite the mortgage. Look at your records and find out whether the grant of the mortgage was conditional on transfer of title to the ground.

If there was no such condition you probably should not be too concerned. If there was such a condition then it is possible that the mortgagor could call in the loan.

In the meantime make sure that mortgage payments are kept up to date. This would make it more difficult for the mortgagor to move against you.

butt1

Condatis wrote: »

Situations where title to a house and the land on which it is built where affected by ACRA campaigns in the 1960s and 70s. Where there were separate titles Ground Rent was usually payable by the owner of the house.

Legislation gave house owners the right to buy out the ground rent according to a specified schedule based on the amount of the ground rent. The creation of new ground rents was prohibited.

It is therefore possible that your title to the house in not recorded with the Land Registry as such registration relates to primarily to the land. From what you say it is likely that the land is still registered to your father.

That is why the mortgager is concerned as they do not unencumbered title, despite the mortgage. Look at your records and find out whether the grant of the mortgage was conditional on transfer of title to the ground.

If there was no such condition you probably should not be too concerned. If there was such a condition then it is possible that the mortgagor could call in the loan.

In the meantime make sure that mortgage payments are kept up to date. This would make it more difficult for the mortgagor to move against you.

yes the land is registered in my fathers name and yes the mortgage was depentant on the site being tranfered into my my name and then my wifes name,does this mean they could call in the full mortgage from us if we dont get the site tranfered from my dad?,we are behind in our mortgage!,where will this end up?,how would this effect my solicitors insurance?

Gurgle

butt1 wrote: »

we are behind in our mortgage!

tbh, I'd say this is your biggest problem.
Whose name is the house in anyway?

the mortgage was depentant on the site being tranfered into my my name

It seems bizarre that the bank actually released the money in the first place to someone who didn't own the site.

naughtysmurf

butt1 wrote: »

yes the land is registered in my fathers name and yes the mortgage was depentant on the site being tranfered into my my name and then my wifes name,does this mean they could call in the full mortgage from us if we dont get the site tranfered from my dad?,we are behind in our mortgage!,where will this end up?,how would this effect my solicitors insurance?

Why would this happen, can your father not transfer the site so it is in both you and your wifes name?

Condatis

You are in a difficult situation and your bank is in something of a pickle.

They could call in the loan but the situation with regard to the house is less clear.

If there is a written agreement between you and your father your rights under that agreement might transfer to the bank which may give them some comfort.

However without title to the land, the house, should they manage to reprocess it, would be of little use to them as they could not sell it.

In that light it may be to your advantage not to pursue, for the time being, transfer to you of title to the ground. To do so might simply gift the property to the bank.

Your best tactic is to come to an arrangement with the bank to pay them whatever you can. Perhaps interest only for time being.

Be aware though that, as the mortgage is the name of your wife, the bank could pursue any other assets she may have – this could extend to attachment of salary.

Jo King

Gurgle wrote: »

tbh, I'd say this is your biggest problem.
Whose name is the house in anyway?

It seems bizarre that the bank actually released the money in the first place to someone who didn't own the site.

It is not bizarre. The bank released the money on the solicitors undertaking. The bank will sue the solicitor for non compliance. The solicitors insurance will have to make good the banks losses out of the whole mess if the title is not transferred. The ground rents legislation is irrelevant as the O/p does not have a lease. He will be relying on promissory estoppel against his father to force him to transfer the site.
The solicitor simply shouldn't have given the undertaking.

beeftotheheels

Jo King wrote: »

He will be relying on promissory estoppel against his father to force him to transfer the site.

That would be a sword rather than a shield!

littlemac1980

Condatis wrote: »

In that light it may be to your advantage not to pursue, for the time being, transfer to you of title to the ground. To do so might simply gift the property to the bank.

Your best tactic is to come to an arrangement with the bank to pay them whatever you can. Perhaps interest only for time being.

I wouldn't agree with that advice.

Victor

Under what conditions would your father agree to transfer the property?

butt1

Victor wrote: »

Under what conditions would your father agree to transfer the property?

he is never goin to sign it over under any conditions,iam just wondering,could i bring him to court,and would a judge make him sign the site over,or would i have a case,or is it my solicitor that would bring him to court?,he has told me that when he dies he is leaveing it to my brother,my dad is 78years

mikom

butt1 wrote: »

hi,hope some ones being down this road before me,my home is build 3yrs,on my dads land,he promised me the site,we have a 200k mortgage,in my wifes name,the mortgage company are know putting pressure on our solicitor to get him to sign the site over,he wont,the solicitor has given the mortgage company a undertaken that the site would be coming into my wifes name,so the solicitor was on about how his insurance would go up?,can anyone through any lite on this,we are afraid we will loose our home,what are our options,where will this endup,court?

You may just have discovered a household charge loophole.

butt1

the mortgage is in my wifes name only

MagicSean

Jo King wrote: »

It is not bizarre. The bank released the money on the solicitors undertaking. The bank will sue the solicitor for non compliance. The solicitors insurance will have to make good the banks losses out of the whole mess if the title is not transferred. The ground rents legislation is irrelevant as the O/p does not have a lease. He will be relying on promissory estoppel against his father to force him to transfer the site.
The solicitor simply shouldn't have given the undertaking.

What losses?

beeftotheheels

butt1 wrote: »

he is never goin to sign it over under any conditions,iam just wondering,could i bring him to court,and would a judge make him sign the site over,or would i have a case,or is it my solicitor that would bring him to court?,he has told me that when he dies he is leaveing it to my brother,my dad is 78years

First things first is you need a new solicitor. Your solicitor is already involved in the mess here and has a vested interest in getting the site transferred. He cannot act for you in this.

It is unlikely that he could sue your Dad in his own right. If he gave an undertaking that the site had been transferred, without having a deed of transfer, he has no one to blame but himself.

Secondly, you may be able to take your Dad to court, but it would be tricky, costly and take time. Depending on what actually happened and how much you can prove you may or may not win.

Can I ask why the property was not transferred at the time if your Dad intended to make you the gift? At what stage did he change his mind?

Is there no way to mend fences here?

page1

beeftotheheels wrote: »

Jo King wrote: »

He will be relying on promissory estoppel against his father to force him to transfer the site.

That would be a sword rather than a shield!

Is it not proprietary estoppel, his father promised to transfer the land to him, he acted in reliance in taking out the mortgage and building a house. The father was aware of all of this and now is refusing to sign over title. Dillwyn v Llewllyn, Inwards v Baker and Wilmot v Barber.

It would depend on the circumstances and upon what exactly was promised and said.

beeftotheheels

page1 wrote: »

Is it not proprietary estoppel, his father promised to transfer the land to him, he acted in reliance in taking out the mortgage and building a house. The father was aware of all of this and now is refusing to sign over title. Dillwyn v Llewllyn, Inwards v Baker and Wilmot v Barber.

It would depend on the circumstances and upon what exactly was promised and said.

Yup, it was a glib response to the suggestion that promissory estoppel could help.

Proprietary estoppel is the one you'd be looking at and then it will all come down to the facts and what can be proven. It will clearly kick in on any attempt to leave the site to the brother, but it is still not clear to me that it can force the completion of the gift now if the father isn't doing anything to interfere with the OPs use of the site?

Kevwoody

butt1 wrote: »

Victor wrote: »

Under what conditions would your father agree to transfer the property?

he is never goin to sign it over under any conditions,iam just wondering,could i bring him to court,and would a judge make him sign the site over,or would i have a case,or is it my solicitor that would bring him to court?,he has told me that when he dies he is leaveing it to my brother,my dad is 78years

I'm not being cheeky here but your dad is 78 years of age, does he not have any idea the pressure he is putting on you? He's not gonna be around much longer, what a waste of a relationship

It sounds to me he doesn't like your wife at all, is this the reason for the fall out?

Also have you discussed the situation with your brother? What would his intentions be if the land was passed to him?

Condatis

Jo King wrote: »

It is not bizarre. The bank released the money on the solicitors undertaking. The bank will sue the solicitor for non compliance. The solicitors insurance will have to make good the banks losses out of the whole mess if the title is not transferred. The ground rents legislation is irrelevant as the O/p does not have a lease. He will be relying on promissory estoppel against his father to force him to transfer the site.
The solicitor simply shouldn't have given the undertaking.

Fair enough: However butt1 has indicated that his father's stance has been influenced by family situations. If this is because, or partly because of prior commitments to other family which may supersede the promise to the poster the father might not be obliged fulfill this promise.

It may be that siblings objected to the proposed gift upon learning of it.

schemingbohemia

Why was the mortgage solely in your wife's name?

Kosseegan

Ultimately I think the father would have to transfer the site and pay the costs of any court action. meantime expect the bank and the solicitors insurance company to start issuing writs.

Condatis

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Why was the mortgage solely in your wife's name?

That has no relevance to the issue at stake.

Gurgle

butt1 wrote: »

he is never goin to sign it over under any conditions

Hang on, we're getting this story in bits and pieces.

So, you've built a house on your father's land without permission (as in legal, written, signed permission) on the assumption that he would give the land to you afterwards.

Your solicitor somehow convinced the bank to hand over your loan even though there has never been a piece of paper signed by the owner of the land stating that he will give / sell / leave that land to you. If anything, it seems he has clearly stated exactly the opposite.

Is there any legal reason why your father couldn't throw you off his land and have the house bulldozed?

schemingbohemia

I think the wife might feel differently about that. At present the OP has no obligation to pay the mortgage, the wife has no claim to the land and the OP's name is not on the mortgage documentation nor on the land so I do think it is relevant.

butt1

my dad doesnt like my my wife because we split up for a few months and i suppose he saw that i was out of the home and maybe that this could happen on a fulltime basics in the future,he did sign it over 2yrs ago but the transaction was void because my mams name was on the deed and she didnt sign it,this wasnt realised by my solicitor until it went to the revenue and was sent back,know my mam has died,this piece of land is still in my mams and dads name,so it 1st ly has to be tranfered to my dads name then mine and then my wifes,my brother doesnt speak to me,very messy,my mam always told me i could have this site,and i suppose my dad played along while she was alive,the house was built while she was alive.she died 2yrs back...messey

beeftotheheels

butt1 wrote: »

my dad doesnt like my my wife because we split up for a few months and i suppose he saw that i was out of the home and maybe that this could happen on a fulltime basics in the future,he did sign it over 2yrs ago but the transaction was void because my mams name was on the deed and she didnt sign it,this wasnt realised by my solicitor until it went to the revenue and was sent back,know my mam has died,this piece of land is still in my mams and dads name,so it 1st ly has to be tranfered to my dads name then mine and then my wifes,my brother doesnt speak to me,very messy,my mam always told me i could have this site,and i suppose my dad played along while she was alive,the house was built while she was alive.she died 2yrs back...messey

That changes things a bit.

So they tried to give you the site but a mistake was made, and now he won't correct the mistake (but is possibly looking out for you?).

That makes it easier legally because a Court could find that an equitable interest has already vested in you if it was a simple mistake which then couldn't be corrected because of your mother's death.

So you don't have the legal title, but you possibly do "own" the site in one respect. You may even be able, legally, to force the registration because of your Mam still being on the deeds.

You need to talk to a solicitor, and you need to talk to your Dad.

Address his concerns head on, but if a solicitor confirms that you probably already "own" the site, then your Dad's actions aren't necessarily protecting what he's trying to protect. So maybe if you could explain that to him, he might change his mind.

There's still the issue of your solicitor's insurance, but that's for him to be concerned about. Not you.

Kevwoody

butt1 wrote: »

my dad doesnt like my my wife because we split up for a few months and i suppose he saw that i was out of the home and maybe that this could happen on a fulltime basics in the future,he did sign it over 2yrs ago but the transaction was void because my mams name was on the deed and she didnt sign it,this wasnt realised by my solicitor until it went to the revenue and was sent back,know my mam has died,this piece of land is still in my mams and dads name,so it 1st ly has to be tranfered to my dads name then mine and then my wifes,my brother doesnt speak to me,very messy,my mam always told me i could have this site,and i suppose my dad played along while she was alive,the house was built while she was alive.she died 2yrs back...messey

Messy doesn't even begin to cover it!
I know u probably have but I would try to reason with your father, because once he passes on I'd say your brother will be eyeing up that house for himself

butt1

can i or my solicitor bring my dad to court,to resolve this,there is no talking to my dad,ive tried everybody and thing,even his solicitor.

Gurgle

butt1 wrote: »

he did sign it over 2yrs ago

Ah, I would expect your solicitor to be focusing on this bit.
(Sorry for your troubles, that's a fcuked up mess alright)

golden lane

butt1 wrote: »

can i or my solicitor bring my dad to court,to resolve this,there is no talking to my dad,ive tried everybody and thing,even his solicitor.

you must get a good solicitor......and find out exactly what your legal position is.........that is a free independant solicitor..............

if there is doubt, then a court must decide...

beeftotheheels

butt1 wrote: »

can i or my solicitor bring my dad to court,to resolve this,there is no talking to my dad,ive tried everybody and thing,even his solicitor.

That will depend on the facts so only someone with all of the facts could answer that. It is highly unlikely that your solicitor could sue your Dad, the better question is whether you should be considering suing your solicitor.

If the mistake was made by your solicitor, or even not spotted by him, you might have a cause for action against him.

You need to sit down with a new solicitor and explain to them in detail, what happened, and get them to advise you of what the correct legal position is. Armed with this knowledge you can then try again to talk to your Dad, or to talk to your Dad's solicitor. Going to Court should only be your very, very last port of call.

But your solicitor is in the middle of this, he could be liable to the bank, he could be liable to you, so you need to stop thinking about what he wants and his insurance. He's part of the problem. He's the one who made the mistake.

Try and mend fences with your Dad, maybe you could unite against your solicitor

Condatis

At this stage butt1 it might be worth your while to consider mediation.

A professional mediation process in a family dispute can take the heat out of a situation and bring about a resolution. It would be less confrontational then a purely legal approach.

The conduct of your original solicitor would remain a distinct issue and would be subject to due process.

Have a look at this site for guidance on mediation.

http://www.themii.ie/index.jsp

roro1neil0

Sounds to me like your dad is in the right here.

You allege that he promised you the land, which is presumably true because why else would he sit by and let you build a house on it. However, it's really your wife who paid for the house to be built, so its her house, proven by the fact you moved out of it.

When your dad dies (excuse my insensitivity, widowers rarely live long after their wives die) the ownership of the land will pass to your brother. Your brother will issue some kind of proceeding to remove your wife from the house on his land, or she will have to relinguish ownership and pay rent.

very messy.

butt1

beeftotheheels wrote: »

That changes things a bit.

So they tried to give you the site but a mistake was made, and now he won't correct the mistake (but is possibly looking out for you?).

That makes it easier legally because a Court could find that an equitable interest has already vested in you if it was a simple mistake which then couldn't be corrected because of your mother's death.

So you don't have the legal title, but you possibly do "own" the site in one respect. You may even be able, legally, to force the registration because of your Mam still being on the deeds.

You need to talk to a solicitor, and you need to talk to your Dad.

Address his concerns head on, but if a solicitor confirms that you probably already "own" the site, then your Dad's actions aren't necessarily protecting what he's trying to protect. So maybe if you could explain that to him, he might change his mind.

There's still the issue of your solicitor's insurance, but that's for him to be concerned about. Not you.

why would our solicitor be worried about his insurance

butt1

does any one on here know any solicitor that would have experience in this field and of course be in my favour,not my dads intrest or my present solicitors intrests

beeftotheheels

butt1 wrote: »

why would our solicitor be worried about his insurance

Because he made a mistake. And his mistake could cost the bank - they can't seize your house and shouldn't have lent you the money to begin with without proper security.

They could sue him rather than you unless he can get his mistake fixed - i.e. gets the site transferred into your wife's name.

But his mistake is what is causing you all this hassle. So you might have a reason to sue him too if you can't get your Dad to perfect the gift (although I doubt he'll have told you this).

This is why you need to talk to a different solicitor.

If he didn't think that he had made a mistake then there is no risk to his insurance. That risk is what proves that he thinks that he has made a mistake.

Condatis

butt1 wrote: »

why would our solicitor be worried about his insurance

Because your bank could sue him for his failure to fulfill his undertaking in respect of transfer of title. Any award would fall to his insurers with consequences for his premium.

MagicSean

beeftotheheels wrote: »

Because he made a mistake. And his mistake could cost the bank - they can't seize your house and shouldn't have lent you the money to begin with without proper security.

They could sue him rather than you unless he can get his mistake fixed - i.e. gets the site transferred into your wife's name.

But his mistake is what is causing you all this hassle. So you might have a reason to sue him too if you can't get your Dad to perfect the gift (although I doubt he'll have told you this).

This is why you need to talk to a different solicitor.

If he didn't think that he had made a mistake then there is no risk to his insurance. That risk is what proves that he thinks that he has made a mistake.

But they haven't actually lost anything have they? Or is the op defaulting?

beeftotheheels

MagicSean wrote: »

But they haven't actually lost anything have they? Or is the op defaulting?

He's in arrears.

But even in terms of selling the loan it is worth less than a loan with proper security - they can't securitize it etc

leeroybrown

butt1 wrote: »

why would our solicitor be worried about his insurance

Because he has unlimited liability in the event he gives bad legal advice or makes an error that affects another party. Each year he is required to pay a rather large insurance premium in order to provide for this potential liability. In the event of a successful claim his insurer will heavily load this premium (we're talking a very large amount of money here) for a number of years in case they have to pay out on other problems. His livelihood is on the line as well as as your home.

You would best advised to to seek the advice of another solicitor who has no conflict of interest.

butt1

do some solicitors specialise in these sort of issues?

Condatis

butt1 wrote: »

do some solicitors specialise in these sort of issues?

Contact the Law Society for names of solicitors.

butt1

beeftotheheels wrote: »

He's in arrears.

But even in terms of selling the loan it is worth less than a loan with proper security - they can't securitize it etc

hi could you please explain this to me,and thank you for all your help