Legal advice

[GTP]

If you have a mortgage the provider may hold original deeds and or relevant information.

[tonto1888]

any legal eagles able ot offer advice?

Me and the missus trying to sell the flat. Sale agreed. All going well. However, the communal deeds are in the ether somewhere.
Developer wh had them went bankrupt and they were never transferred to the new management company. Looks like the sale has fallen through. Anything we can do to get them? This could prevent any future sale happening

The solicitor who acted when you bought the property should have addressed this .( communal paperwork would have been with the original title pack .

Contact solicitor for the paperwork he has onfile.
You would have received a share in the original management company  so should a start and given that you pay a service charge you should know who the new management company is so a search in companies house can show you shareholders .

its her flat, I moved in with her over the summer. She is gonna contact the solicitor she used when she bought it. We know who the management company are and have been linking with them to try and get the communal deeds but no joy so far.
Cheers

[David McKeown]

any legal eagles able ot offer advice?

Me and the missus trying to sell the flat. Sale agreed. All going well. However, the communal deeds are in the ether somewhere.
Developer wh had them went bankrupt and they were never transferred to the new management company. Looks like the sale has fallen through. Anything we can do to get them? This could prevent any future sale happening

This is from personal experience rather than legal expertise in this area but it may be helpful.

It only applies to the North, it may apply to the south (slightly modified) but it's been 20+ years since I did land law.

A very similar thing happened me when I sold my apartment about 9 years ago. The land is now what's called Bona Vacantia. That is to say the ownership of same has reverted to the crown. Anyone with a legal interest can apply to the high court to have the land transferred out of crown ownership. Ideally you want that to be either the original developer or more properly the management company so that one of them can foot the bill. It's a relatively straightforward application for a solicitor but it's not quick. It took me about three years to get mine sorted.

You can get away with it if the purchasers solicitor doesn't do a good job but I wouldn't hold my breath on it.

So moral is I'd speak to whoever was doing the conveyance for you and get their advice.

[Baile Brigín 2]

Sorry Dave, Priory Hall, the ghost estates, mica etc taught us the state most certainly doesn't step in in the south.

I sold an apartment in a block with a minor fire cert issue, developer ran to the hills. My solicitor was flabbergasted I got it through, a number of sales collapsed. On the management company to borrow to rectify.

However in tonto's case someone owns the papers. I would be straight onto the management company admin. What are you paying into? The company has to have them otherwise are they a legitimate management company?

[David McKeown]

Sorry Dave, Priory Hall, the ghost estates, mica etc taught us the state most certainly doesn't step in in the south.

I sold an apartment in a block with a minor fire cert issue, developer ran to the hills. My solicitor was flabbergasted I got it through, a number of sales collapsed. On the management company to borrow to rectify.

However in tonto's case someone owns the papers. I would be straight onto the management company admin. What are you paying into? The company has to have them otherwise are they a legitimate management company?

I dont think that is correct, unless I am misunderstanding the issue but this isnt about the state stepping in, in anyway.  The original developer who owned the communal area did not transfer them before it was wound up.  The property then doesn't transfer but instead the doctrine of bona vacantia applies and the property reverts to the Crown in Northern Ireland or the Minister for Public Expenditure in the south.  The Crown solicitors office deals with it in the North not sure about the south.   

In terms of not owning the areas you are managing that is not unusual in the North particularly in developments built during the boom.  Its not ideal.

Any way my advice would be get on to your solicitor, get them to pressure anyone with a legal claim over the land to contact the Crown Solicitor and get the ball rolling on getting the land properly vested.  As I say not usually a quick process

[Baile Brigín 2]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

[David McKeown]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

[tonto1888]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

[Baile Brigín 2]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

The fundamental point of a management company is to own and maintain common areas. They need to immediately tell you who holds these deeds and when they plan on getting their hands on them.

[David McKeown]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

The fundamental point of a management company is to own and maintain common areas. They need to immediately tell you who holds these deeds and when they plan on getting their hands on them.

The problem is a lot of management companies in the north tend to be made up of residents who aren't experienced in the area that's if they even function. In my apartment case the management company hadn't met in a number of years and in the end to advance things my mother ended up getting appointed chair just to move things on then left as soon as the apartment was sold. So a lot will depend on what kind of management company you have. I have limited experience of them in the south but from that they do all seem much more professional.

Might be helpful to know what side of the border the apartment is on

[tonto1888]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

The fundamental point of a management company is to own and maintain common areas. They need to immediately tell you who holds these deeds and when they plan on getting their hands on them.

The problem is a lot of management companies in the north tend to be made up of residents who aren't experienced in the area that's if they even function. In my apartment case the management company hadn't met in a number of years and in the end to advance things my mother ended up getting appointed chair just to move things on then left as soon as the apartment was sold. So a lot will depend on what kind of management company you have. I have limited experience of them in the south but from that they do all seem much more professional.

Might be helpful to know what side of the border the apartment is on

we are in Belfast. The management company are trying to get it sorted but have said it will be discussed at their agm which doesnt help us short term. Think we will try and rent it out until it gets sorted. No help with the 2nd property stamp duty but at least the mortgage would be covered and we will have 3 years to sell it and claim back

[BigGreenField]

If an AGM is the solution then there will be a mechanism to force an EGM.

The solution likely involves and application to land registry and purchase of indemnity insurance (to indemnify any purchaser of your flat that there won't be an issue with communal areas)

A larger solicitors with a commercial real estate practice should be able to handle.

If the developer has gone bust the original law firm who acted for them or their bank may have details - you can see who this is from historic filings by developer at companies house (when you purchased what was the name of the selling entity), there will mortgage docs filed with legal details.

 

[Baile Brigín 2]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

The fundamental point of a management company is to own and maintain common areas. They need to immediately tell you who holds these deeds and when they plan on getting their hands on them.

The problem is a lot of management companies in the north tend to be made up of residents who aren't experienced in the area that's if they even function. In my apartment case the management company hadn't met in a number of years and in the end to advance things my mother ended up getting appointed chair just to move things on then left as soon as the apartment was sold. So a lot will depend on what kind of management company you have. I have limited experience of them in the south but from that they do all seem much more professional.

Might be helpful to know what side of the border the apartment is on

we are in Belfast.

My sympathies.

So ignore everything I said. Which is a pity because it was brilliant

[tonto1888]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

The fundamental point of a management company is to own and maintain common areas. They need to immediately tell you who holds these deeds and when they plan on getting their hands on them.

The problem is a lot of management companies in the north tend to be made up of residents who aren't experienced in the area that's if they even function. In my apartment case the management company hadn't met in a number of years and in the end to advance things my mother ended up getting appointed chair just to move things on then left as soon as the apartment was sold. So a lot will depend on what kind of management company you have. I have limited experience of them in the south but from that they do all seem much more professional.

Might be helpful to know what side of the border the apartment is on

we are in Belfast.

My sympathies.

So ignore everything I said. Which is a pity because it was brilliant

haha. I did enjoy reading it if thats any good

[David McKeown]

Sorry Dave, you are wrong here.

Firstly what would the Minister for Public Expenditure have to do with it? The council or Department of Housing would be first up if that was a thing.

The developer will hold the asset and it would be dealt with by the receiver who will ultimately sell it to the management company. That process us likely happening but tonto needs them to confirm. If they aren't involved in a conversation then he has bigger problems.  Again, no idea where this apartment is, but if south of the border he has no state agency coming over the hill here.

You forget the south is a great deal more capitalist, especially round housing. The state doesn't step in, like this. The developers assets get sold on. The management company have dibs, and the receiver knows it. So they can charge what they like.

Sorry I had read this as either the developer or more likely some subsidiary company created by the developer (very common in the north) had been bankrupted a long time ago and was therefore no longer in the picture. If there is still a legal entity or receiver holding the deeds then you are correct.

If however the receivership process is complete and the developer or a subsidiary is no longer in existence then what I have outlined above is correct.

That issue would need clarified first.

Yes. I believe the developer has gone bankrupt and the deeds were never transferred to the new management company

The fundamental point of a management company is to own and maintain common areas. They need to immediately tell you who holds these deeds and when they plan on getting their hands on them.

The problem is a lot of management companies in the north tend to be made up of residents who aren't experienced in the area that's if they even function. In my apartment case the management company hadn't met in a number of years and in the end to advance things my mother ended up getting appointed chair just to move things on then left as soon as the apartment was sold. So a lot will depend on what kind of management company you have. I have limited experience of them in the south but from that they do all seem much more professional.

Might be helpful to know what side of the border the apartment is on

we are in Belfast. The management company are trying to get it sorted but have said it will be discussed at their agm which doesnt help us short term. Think we will try and rent it out until it gets sorted. No help with the 2nd property stamp duty but at least the mortgage would be covered and we will have 3 years to sell it and claim back

Yeah I ended up having to do that. My place was in Wellington Square