header-logo header-logo

23 January 2015 / Nicholas Asprey
Issue: 7637 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Harsh justice

Can an equitable interest in a house take priority over a legal charge? Nicholas Asprey reports

Take a simple case in which an elderly lady living on her own wishes to raise money for her old age. She owns the house in which she lives. A friend suggests that she sells the house to him and he will rent it back to her at a discounted rent. He assures her that she can remain living there for as long as she likes. The sale price is reduced accordingly.

The purchaser applies for a mortgage loan. He instructs solicitors, who also act for the lender. Other solicitors act for the vendor. The lender is told that the house is being purchased subject to an assured shorthold tenancy (AST) of six month’s duration, but is not told about the promise made to the vendor that she can live there for as long as she likes. The draft contract makes no mention of this promise either.

Contracts are exchanged, the vendor executes a transfer in favour of the purchaser

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll