About CQS Conveyancing

One major difference between the BSA instructions, introduced last month, and the CML Handbook is additional clauses dealing with the registration of mortgages where a priority period has expired. Clause E.30 states “If you cannot register our mortgage within the priority period afforded by your Land Registry Search made before completion you must register a unilateral notice to protect our position. Simply renewing your original Land Registry Search is not acceptable.” Clause E.31 states: “If registration at the Land Registry has not been completed within three months from completion you must write to us explaining the reason for the delay and keep us regularly informed of the position until registration has been completed.” The above BSA clauses are aimed at dealing with the problem of mortgages not being registered within priority periods: a major cause professional negligence in the field of conveyancing. The usual situation is that a conveyancing solicitor acts for a buyer on a p...

Have any conveyancers noticed the change in conveyancing requirements for Leeds Building Society ? Having received a notification from LENDERmonitor as to a change I thought I would share it with you as yet a further example of how lenders make conveyancing increasingly difficult and complex. Leeds have made two changes. The first relates to monies received from third parties paying monies towards the purchase price and the second relates to building insurance. The changes are as follows : Old : 5.9 - Contact point if borrower is not providing balance of purchase price from funds/proposing to give second charge. New : 5.9 -If the balance of the purchase price is being paid wholly or in part by anyone other than the borrower, you must provide us with a declaration of this amount, that such an amount is not repayable and that the party providing this amount will not acquire an interest in the property. You must also ensure that clear bankruptcy searches are carried out against the bor...

The advice by the Court of Appeal in their decision against the council in Welwyn Hatfield Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government was that local planning authorities need to look carefully at the inside of buildings, not just at the exterior, when determining whether a building has been constructed and used in accordance with planning permission. In this fascinating case, the Court of Appeal allowed a landowner's appeal and held that the landowner was entitled to a certificate of lawfulness even though landowner confirmed in his evidence to the planning inspector that he had deliberately deceived the council when applying for planning permission. Having obtained planning permission for a hay barn, a landowner constructed a building that externally looked like a barn but which was internally fitted out as a dwelling house. The landowner and his wife lived in the building for four years before applying for a retrospective planning permission. Is it really ...