I am a tenant coming to the end of my Shorthold Tenancy Agreement contract, and I have reason to believe a few things are amiss regarding the ownership of the property and who I pay rent to. It is possible I am living in a property that is bona vacantia. I will give more details in a PM if there is anyone willing to help me out with a bit of knowledge. If there is anyone willing to hear the problem in a nutshell via PM and give me a little bit of guidance I'd be really grateful. Let me know on this thread whether I can PM you or PM me to let me know. Thanks.
Thanks, I've already done a lot of legwork. I have the Title Register, which I got from that site, and know who supposedly owns the property, etc. I just need someone that will be able to tell me what I can and should do with the information I have.
I wouldn't say I was an expert, so no point PMing really unless you really want to tell your tale, but I do know that if you're thinking about adverse possession (ie squatters rights) as a possible way forward you've next to no chance as that route was severely restricted by Parliament in the last few years. In fact if the land is registered as soon as you try to make a claim the Land Registry alert the title holder.
The registered title holder is a company that has been dissolved since last summer. Moreover, the company never filed accounts and were near to dissolution throughout its entire 2 year existence it seems. All I wish to do is find out how the landlord (who has no attachment I can find whatsoever to the dissolved company, who we pay money to through our agent) is attached to the property, as he isn't registered as the owner anywhere. I understand that it is fine for a landlord to not be the property owner, as they could be subletting and as tenants we don't need to know this by law when signing tenancy agreements, etc. But this does appear to be slightly different as the owner is a dissolved company, so our landlord cannot be letting it from them. I am not an expert, but it seems like the property can only be owned by the Crown owing to the previous title holder's dissolution, or owned by the landlord without the records being updated for whatever reason. If the property is in fact bona absentia (owned by the Crown, effectively), surely there's some sort of fraud or some legal tinkering going on, seeing as we pay money to someone for a property they do not own or rent. I'm just trying to work things out and don't really know of any other possibilities than the above. If you have any other ideas, please by all means tell me them. (I don't think this is libellous, but I was initially not sure about posting the finer details. I will remove the above if anyone thinks it might be in some way libellous. I am stating a couple of facts, and a couple of possible situations, so hopefully nothing wrong with that.)
It's not libellous as you've not named anyone. Assests of a disolved company are usually sold on in some form or other to pay back creditors. The liquidation is overseen by the Insolvency Service who will arrange for that sale to take place. I would make an educated guess that the last fly-by-night property ownership company mysteriously handed over all it's assets to another similarly named and constituted company just prior to liquidation. Failure to register it correctly will only reduce the owners rights. As for what to do common sense dicates that your motive in finding out is the main lead. If it's curiosity I'd just ask the landlord. Of course if you wanted to be more provocative just stop paying the rent and see what happens. If you're seeking a way to somehow gain possession of the property ultimately professional legal advice is the way forward.
Cheers. I'm only a few weeks from moving out, but I would perhaps try and gain possession of the property if it is indeed bona absentia. I just spoke to someone from the Treasury Solicitors Department, and it sounds like they could be informed about this should I wish to take things further, but would have to do so through the proper channels. They are supposed to find new buyers etc, but they do not automatically get told when a company with land is dissolved. It sometimes takes someone like me to tell them. As to your suggestion that the previous owner handed over its assets, including my flat, to another similarly named company, this seems unlikely as the Title Holder would be that new company, not the old. This has a company number and everything, so it is definitely registered as being owned by the dissolved company, and so, by the Crown now. Anyway, off to work now, but if anyone has any other suggestions as to where I might be able to find out more, please let me know. Thanks UEA, much appreciated.
Land registration isn't automatic. Ultimately the buyer or their agent has to fill out a form and send it to the Land Registry to get the buyer's name against the title. If they can still show a contract for the sale, prove money changed hands, show some form of control over the property etc then the fact they're not named on the title isn't the end of the world. It's not exactly fantastic administration mind you.
Does your uni not have a student legal advice place? I know when we bought a house we were told we could give the contract to them and they could read through with expertise and check through it. Maybe try them.
I think bad or lost paperwork is the most likely contributor to this odd-looking situation. Thing is, I've found the price for the flat and I think it isnt totally mad to think I could buy the place myself. So if there is something dodgy going on there might be a happy ending from it all.
