The Proposed Purchase of a Leasehold Flat
Extracts from Forty-Three Relevant Emails
For the leasehold flat in question, the Freehold Title was lost in 1981 and is still missing, the Freeholder is absent and the terms of the Lease are being widely ignored by the four existing leaseholders. There is no management structure and no comprehensive insurance for the building containing the four flats, nor for the land on which the building stands. Each leaseholder is responsible for the insurance of their own property.
There is a history of disputes between leaseholders, leading to violence and police intervention on two separate occasions. Several other police visits have occurred following claims of harassment.
Given all this, it will be interestng to see how the sale progresses. What role will the two conveyancers play, one supporting the seller, the other protecting the rights and interests of the purchaser?
All the negotiations have been carried out by email and here are relevant extracts from all of them to date. So far, the 43 emails cover a period of 56 days (8 weeks) and in full consist of 8,444 words.
There is a history of disputes between leaseholders, leading to violence and police intervention on two separate occasions. Several other police visits have occurred following claims of harassment.
Given all this, it will be interestng to see how the sale progresses. What role will the two conveyancers play, one supporting the seller, the other protecting the rights and interests of the purchaser?
All the negotiations have been carried out by email and here are relevant extracts from all of them to date. So far, the 43 emails cover a period of 56 days (8 weeks) and in full consist of 8,444 words.
21 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I'll contact a solicitor today and confirm the process and projected time lines.
Could you let me know which solicitor you'll be using so I can contact a different firm.
21 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
Our solicitor/conveyancer would be either PHH in Cleveleys who hold our wills, or Anthony Davis at Hayworth Brotherton in Cleveleys.
21 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Understood. I’ll go ahead and meet my solicitor anyway as I need to appoint one.
23 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
The address of our solicitor/conveyancer is: Anthony Davis, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors, etc.
23 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Thank you very much for letting me know we can proceed. My solicitors contact details are: Janet Soliman, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors, etc.
23 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
You'll see from the exchange of emails below dated 21 February 2024 that we would use either PHH or Haworth Brotherton. This afternoon we wrote to tell you we are using Anthony Davis at Haworth Brotherton, after visiting and speaking to him this morning.
So we are now at the same firm, albeit with a different person! It is a big advantage to both you and ourselves that we use Anthony Davis at Haworth Brotherton, since he knows us, is completely familiar with the missing freehold problems and the problematic neighbour, and will not raise these as issues.
23 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I missed that. I'll ask my solicitor's advice. I'm sure she can recommend someone.
24 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
On Wednesday 21 February 2024 we emailed Philip Deane, the seller of the flat at 15D Rossendale Avenue South, that we would approach you to act for us. Following our conversation with you on Friday 23 February 2024 we confirmed to him by email that you would be acting for us. He had asked for this information so that we did not have a clash of solicitors.
Replying to our emails (but clearly not having read them), Philip Deane emailed later on Friday 23rd that he had appointed your colleague Janet Soliman to act for him! We mention this in case Ms Soliman approaches you for clarification on this matter. We have made it clear to Philip Deane that we prefer to have you, not least because of your prior knowledge of the freehold issues.
26 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for your email. There is indeed a clash. I spoke with our Janet Soliman, who has confirmed what you say. In the circumstances and due to the increased risk of a conflict of interest, we would not be able to act for you and Mr Deane. Best of luck with the purchase!
26 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
Our two putative solicitors at Haworth Brotherton have met and decided neither wants to represent either of us! Davis used the excuse 'clash of interest'. We have now appointed Fylde Law to act for us.
26 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Please let us know how a conflict of interest arises for you, given that Philip Deane will appoint a solicitor from a different firm. He acknowledges the error: on Friday 23 February 2024 at 18.39 he wrote: "Ooops. I missed that. I'll ask my solicitor's advice. I'm sure she can recommend someone."
26 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for coming back to me. I can understand your confusion, however, when I spoke with our Mrs Soliman, she confirmed we had been instructed (to act for the Seller). I will clarify and come back to you asap.
26 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I’ll contact Janet (Soliman) and clarify her concerns. I’ll also ask her to recommend another firm, other than Fylde Law.
26 February 2024
From Jeanette Critchley, Legal Secretary, Fylde Law
Thank you for your instructions. I will now arrange for a file to be opened and for our initial client care paperwork to be with you in the next few days.
26 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Just telephoned Janet Soliman at Haworth Brotherton. She has agreed to represent me for the sale and conveyancing of 15D. I mentioned the email you received from Anthony, she said that as there is no estate agent, Anthony felt it was better for you to use a different solicitor. I've no idea how or why they came to that conclusion. I didn't press her.
She's very happy to continue and work with Fylde law, she seems very familiar with them.
26 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Philip Deane, the seller of the flat, has just let me know that Janet Soliman is acting for him.
27 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for confirming. Best of luck with everything!
27 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Regrettably from my point of view there is now more to consider. The flat seller, Philip Deane, has written as follows:
“She (Janet Soliman) has agreed to represent me for the sale and conveyancing of 15D.
I mentioned the email you received from Anthony, she said that as there is no estate agent, Anthony felt it was better for you to use a different solicitor. I've no idea how or why they came to that conclusion. I didn't press her.”
I have no idea either. It seems that Janet Soliman has appropriated one of your clients with an irrational justification, a client with whom you had already reached an agreement, had promised to send cost details of the conveyancing process and agreed to look again at the process of reconstituting the freehold title.
There is another relevant ambiguity (if that is the right word). In your email of 26 February 2024, you wrote: “I spoke with our Janet Soliman, who has confirmed what you say. In the circumstances and due to the increased risk of a conflict of interest, we would not be able to act for you and Mr Deane.” I took this to mean that neither of you would act for either of us (self and Philip Deane) and I informed Philip accordingly. But on the same day, on the telephone, Ms Soliman agreed to act for him.
I don’t know what was meant by “Janet Soliman, who has confirmed what you say”. I said that I preferred your services, that I had informed Philip Deane in advance of his approach to Janet Soliman, and that he agreed to seek an alternative representative. All of this is in writing.
In wondering why this is happening, Margaret recalled that Alma Deane, Philip’s mother, had mentioned in conversation that she had used Janet Soliman (by name) on occasion on matters to do with the lease, etc. It may be that Ms Soliman is dealing with Alma’s will, perhaps dealing with probate and maybe as her executor. From a cost and convenience point of view, this would go well with the sale of the flat, which was the centre piece of her estate. There is also a second property in Spain, inherited by Philip’s brother Graeme, which itself may be sold later in the year.
Haworth Brotherton have a very thorough complaints procedure which encourages resolution at this early stage. What I need is the complete and honest explanation of what has been happening and an apology for the inconvenience it has caused.
27 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for your email. I am sorry that you feel inconvenienced, however, in the circumstances my approach is correct – SRA rules do not allow me/us to act for more than one party in a transaction where there is a significant risk of a conflict of interests. Mr Deane has formally instructed this firm to act for him. I expect this is due to Janet Soliman’s longstanding prior involvement with the family’s affairs, as you refer to below. Your email of Saturday 24th February 2024 @ 5.14pm confirmed Mr Deane had appointed Janet Soliman and on reading your email on Monday morning, I discussed with Mrs Soliman and promptly advised you of the increased risk of a conflict of interest and that we cannot act for you both.
1 March 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Not ‘inconvenienced’, I feel personally insulted by your response. It is obvious and quite clear that it would have been a conflict of interest. What is objectionable is the manner in which that conflict arose quite deliberately and knowingly by yourself and Ms Soliman. She initiated it and you condoned it. As you know the seller apologised for the conflict, as we had engaged your services first for good reasons, and he agreed to seek another conveyancer. Ms Soliman convinced him otherwise for her own benefit and convenience, using the absence of an estate agent as an unusual excuse, leaving us to find another conveyancer.
Perhaps you welcomed the opportunity to use the artificially created conflict of interest as an opportunity to abruptly drop the case you had started. There was an obvious reluctance on your part concerning the problematic conveyancing and the possible recreation of the freehold title. But you had agreed to take it on.
I particularly didn’t like your phrase ‘Best of luck with the purchase!’ as you abandoned me to find another conveyancer, with the subsequent need to go through a lengthy description of all the problems with the purchase of the flat. The conveyancer would search the Land Registry for the freehold title and find nothing. How would the conveyancer know if the seller’s solicitor was being completely frank about all the issues with the flat, including the history of disputes and assaults?
I do need the opinion of a third party on what has ensued which is, to say the least, based on quite unprofessional behaviour. Therefore, I proceed to the second stage of Haworth Brotherton’s complaints procedure with a chronologically arranged report.
2 March 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I submitted the documents to Janet Soliman yesterday, so the ball is now rolling.
5 March 2024
From Andrew Brotherton, Client Care Partner, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
Thank you for your email dated 1st March 2024 addressed to my colleague and partner Mr Anthony Davis, the contents of which are noted.
I am very sorry to read that you feel personally insulted by Mr Davis’s response to your earlier emails. I can assure you that this was not his intention. Whilst I note that you have very strong feelings about this matter, I must advise that I cannot agree with your claim that either Mr Davis or Mrs Soliman have acted either unprofessionally or inappropriately in this matter. I do not agree that any person at this office has “artificially created a conflict of interest” to your detriment, that is simply not the case.
All solicitors are required to objectively assess the potential for conflicts of interest at the start of any potential transaction. The test is an objective assessment taking into account the facts known about the transaction at the time of making the assessment. The assessment is not made against any particular potential client, but rather for the benefit of any potential client. There is no single objective test to determine whether or not there is a conflict of interest, it is a judgement for each solicitor and firm of solicitors in each and every transaction. I am satisfied that both Mr Davis and Mrs Soliman have properly assessed the potential for risk in this matter.
I understand that you are in agreement that there would have been a conflict of interests in this firm acting for both parties in this transaction. I further understand that whilst you accept that there would have been a conflict of interests, that you were not pleased in the way you were advised of the outcome of the assessment, and as a result of which you have asked us to provide a chronology of events.
Further to your specific request I can confirm the chronology of events is as follows:-
I am sorry that you have found it necessary to raise a formal complaint, but I cannot agree that either Mr Davis or Mrs Soliman have acted either inappropriately or unprofessionally in this matter. I note that at the point of advising you that we could not act on your behalf in this matter on account of a potential for conflict of interest, Mr Davis had not yet provided you with an estimate of costs, nor had he opened a file in your name in this matter, nor had he issued you with a client care letter and so had not received your completed instruction documentation to formally appoint us as your legal representative to act on your behalf in this matter.
I do hope that this email helps in explaining the process which has been undertaken in assessing the risks and the needs of all clients and potential clients in this matter.
Whilst I am sure you might still feel let down I can assure you that the assessment of potential for conflict of interest is not to be taken personally against any party, but simply has to take into account the facts and circumstances of each and every case.
I agree with the outcome of the assessment made by my colleagues in that it is in your best interests that you have the benefit of independent legal advice in your proposed purchase of this property.
If you still remain dissatisfied with the handling of your complaint you can ask the Legal Ombudsman to consider the complaint. The Legal Ombudsman can be contacted at P O Box 6806, Wolverhampton WV1 9WJ; Telephone:- 0300 555 0333; Website:- www.legalombudsman.org.uk.
5 March 2024
To Andrew Brotherton, Client Care Partner, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
The following attachment was forwarded:
The Haworth Brotherton Complaints Procedure
I could complain that you are not following your own complaints procedure, starting with paragraph 1. And what happened to paragraphs 2 to 4? To remind you:
1.If the matter cannot be resolved after a conversation or initial correspondence, you may progress your complaint to our Client Care Partner – Andrew Brotherton.
2.We will record your complaint in our central register and open a separate file for your complaint.
3.A letter will be sent to you acknowledging your complaint within 5 workings days. We will tell you how long it will take us to investigate your complaint. This normally takes around three to four weeks, but it could be less or more (either due to the circumstances of your complaint, illness or holidays). In any event this should never be more than eight weeks after acknowledging receipt of your complaint.
4.Your complaint will be investigated. This will normally involve the following steps:-
· We will review your file and if necessary talk to the person dealing with your case.
· We will send you the result of our investigation by post or email.
· We may invite you to a meeting to discuss your complaint and hopefully resolve it.
· We will write to you to confirm what took place and any solutions we have agreed with you.
I have not progressed my complaint to the Client Care Partner yet. I may decide not to; it is a basic assumption in any complaints procedure that the customer, the complainant, is in charge of the process at each stage. It is, after all, their complaint and their responsibility to frame it, which I have yet to do.
I will of course read carefully what you have written, but you have made it very difficult to formulate my version of the complaint when you have so fully defended the two staff members involved, and already drawn your conclusion. Without having heard from me.
For example, on Sunday 3rd March 2024 I had a long and very fruitful meeting with the seller of the property in question, Philip Deane, before he returned to Japan today. This helped my to see the situation from his point of view, which is also important. After all, it is the client who chooses the solicitor and not the other way round!
A key factor for me has been that of professional behaviour; I myself having worked at a senior professional level in higher education. Should the matter now be moved on to the third stage in the procedure, I will not have had an opportunity to explain just what the complaint is. For example, the matter is not whether there was a conflict of interest, of course there was, but who created it and why? And why was I so unceremoniously dumped with a brusque ‘Good Luck’?
5. At this stage, if you are still not satisfied you should contact us again. We will then arrange to review our decision. This will happen in one of the following ways:-
· Another partner in the firm will review the Client Care Partner’s decision within ten days.
· We will invite you to agree to independent mediation within five days. We will let you know how long this process will take.
There is no indication in your complaints procedure of any time limit before the complaint is presented to the Client Care Partner. We know from experience that the Legal Ombudsman expects “complaints to be made to them within one year of the date of the act or omission about which you are concerned.” They are not in a hurry.
From Andrew Brotherton, Client Care Partner, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
I thank you for your email dated 5th March 2024 together with attachment. I note your comments but I have nothing to add to the content of my email to you sent on Tuesday 5th March 2024.
6 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
You should note that the Freehold Title is lost and missing, the Freeholder is absent and the terms of the Lease are being widely ignored. There is no management structure and no comprehensive insurance for the whole property of four flats, with each leaseholder responsible for their own insurance. There is also a history of disputes between leaseholders, leading to violence and police intervention on two separate occasions. The last one occurred on 27th March 2022 when the seller of 15D, Philip Deane, attracted a police record (no formal charges) for an alleged assault on the leaseholder of 15C. This same leaseholder of 15C assaulted me earlier, on 6 April 2020. Although I didn’t press charges, a Common Assault Case Number was created and the leaseholder given a formal police warning.
The seller is aware of all this and should report it, and Laura may be aware of it from the help she gave to me and my wife in March 2022 in tracing the freehold of 15B. I accept all these issues, given the very reasonable price.
13 March 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I have now reviewed the contract pack sent to us by the seller's solicitor and have sent them my initial enquiries.
14 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
We can make an immediate response to the Plan and the Contents Form, but the Property Information Form will take a little longer since it rides rather roughshod over any issue relating to its leasehold status without a Freehold Title, a Freeholder, a functioning lease, a management structure and continuing disputes with another leaseholder. We question the validity of the Property Information for another potential purchaser with no prior knowledge of the situation. We don't know if Philip Deane's solicitor, Janet Soliman, had sufficient knowledge to be in a position to guide Philip. More details a little later.
The Contents Form: It is not clear what is meant by 'contents' other than them being more than fittings and fixtures. I mention this because Philip left the flat fully furnished and equipped, other than he and his brother removing purely personal items. Should all this content be listed in order for me to become their legal owner, otherwise how do I explain where they all came from?
Overall, I think there should be a separate form altogether for leasehold flats.
15 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Further to my email of 14 March 2024, copied below, I am writing on the subject of the Property Information Form. I also acknowledge the receipt of the EPC, which has a quite acceptable rating of C, although I would query it on two points. There is cavity wall insulation (although the seller may not have known that) and the floor, rather being ‘non/applicable, is very well insulated by the heated flat below!
The Property Information Form: This has been filled in as if what was being sold/bought was the ‘ownership’ of a ‘property’, rather than the lease (the ‘right to occupy’) of a leasehold flat, one of four in a building and grounds owned by a freeholder. Several questions have been answered that would relate only to the freehold, whilst the issues of the missing Freehold Title etc are not mentioned. This is illustrated by the first question:
1 This whole section (Boundaries) should have been left blank.
2.1 The dispute is ongoing. Robert Murphy, the occupant of Flat 15C (below the flat to be purchased), is firmly of the opinion that he owns all the ground surrounding his flat, which is half of the total ground on which the four flats stand. He reacts violently and with foul-mouthed threats if anyone walks or drives within this area, which he monitors with at least 9 external CCTV cameras.
2.2 The situation described at 2.1 remains unresolved and the situation with the absentee freeholder also remains unresolved.
6.1 This depends on what is meant by ‘the property’. Each leaseholder is responsible for insuring their flat, but there is no freeholder nor any management structure that insures the building as whole, the grounds, the garages, etc.
6.3 There is no landlord!
8.1 This is just not true. There are no arrangements at all to share costs of any kind. My wife Margaret in flat 15B and Alma Deane, leaseholder of flat 15D for nearly 30 years, funded matters such as matching new guttering, downpipes, soffits, facias, etc. Margaret funded tarmacking, new garage roof, tree trimming, repairs to wrought iron gate, etc. The leaseholders of flats 15A and 15C funded nothing.
8.2 The lease gives each leaseholder the right of ingress and egress to their own garage by car, although the leaseholder of flat 15C forcibly prevents this on that side of the property.
8.3 The answer is Yes in the ways described so far!
8.6 The answer is Yes. Access is defined and restricted by the terms of the lease (see plan with colours).
9.1 The terms of the lease prohibit parking within the grounds, although access to the individual garages is permitted.
10.1 By answering ‘No’ this is another of several ways of not acknowledging that this is a leasehold flat with no management structure of any kind. The lease requires a small annual ground-rental fee to be paid to the landlord; the reason why it isn’t paid is that there is no landlord.
Summary: The effect of the absent Freehold Title, Freeholder and Management Structure, along with the non-imposition of the terms of the lease, underlie many of the answers on this form. But without the underlying causes being mentioned, a potential buyer who did not know the true situation would be completely misled. I am concerned that the seller’s solicitor was not aware of this, or let it pass.
Overall, as a purchaser, fortunately I know what I am buying, but I do need this to be fully and honestly stated and defined in what is or will be a legal document.
19 March 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
The solicitor has passed on to us the Property Information Form and the Fittings and Contents Form, as well as the EPC and the Land Registry Plan. We have made some comments particularly on the Property Information Form in order to clarify the distinction between what is being purchased (the lease) and the rest of it (the freehold). This is to pre-empt any issues that may arise from later searches, particularly of the Land Registry.
19 March 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Please let me know if you need any additional information or if there's anything I can do to facilitate the transition of ownership.
20 March 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Whilst you are able to communicate directly with the seller, I must advise that I can only take instructions from their solicitor and send any further enquiries through them.
21 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I understand the kind of protocols that solicitors and conveyancers have to follow and I did not assume that you could or would want to communicate directly with the seller, but I did regard it as an advantage for me.
For example, I had a number of comments and questions about the completed Property Information Form and the Fittings and Contents Form, to which you made no response. I don’t know in what form the comments were passed to the seller’s conveyancer, or how she might communicate with the seller. And him back to her. And she back to you. And you to me.
Given the complexity and delicacy of the freehold and leasehold problems and the range and quality of the contents remaining in the flat, it is very important that I can directly reassure the seller over any doubts or misunderstandings that may arise. Thus far he has been extremely generous and helpful and I do not want to lose that through miscommunication.
27 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I am increasingly concerned that I am not involved in the purchase of the flat for which you are undertaking the conveyancing. A month ago, on 26 February 2024, Jeanette Crutchley emailed details of your costs, which I agreed the same day, and a file was opened at Fylde Law. Since then, I have given you full details about myself as a prospective purchaser and replied with comments when you forwarded the seller’s completed Property Information Form, the Fittings and Contents Form, etc.
There has been no mention that I am proposing to purchase a lease, rather than a property, with all the extra complexities in this particular case. The lease is in two rather similar parts; the first is a contract between the freeholder and the leaseholder; the second is a contract among the four leaseholders. There is no freehold title, there is no freeholder and there are no agreements among the leaseholders. Indeed, the terms of the lease are largely being ignored. So can the lease have any legal standing in these circumstances? What am I buying? Please advise me.
On another matter, four years ago a solicitor pointed out an unusual feature of the lease for the two upstairs properties (15B and 15D). The First Schedule on page 14 of the lease (see extract below) defines those parts of the property demised to these two leaseholders. They include the external walls, floors and ceilings, joists and roof space, all of which usually remain the responsibility of the freeholder.
The external wall of flat 15D has fixed to it aerials, satellite dishes and cables belonging to the leaseholder of flat 15C. They were erected without prior notice, consent or agreement with the previous long-term leaseholder of flat 15D, Mrs Alma Deane, who was absent in Spain at the time. Also, fixed on three sides of flat 15C and its garage, there are twelve recording CCTV cameras, one of which is aimed at the front door of flat 15D. No-one would buy a dwelling that has such intrusions into the privacy of themselves, visitors and tradespeople, or have their own walls strung with a neighbour’s aerials, satellite dishes and cables.
Please advise me on what action might be taken before completion, or included in the contract, that would make it the responsibility of the seller’s conveyancer to correct this situation, which should not in any way be a matter for me. We can then agree on an instruction to the seller’s solicitor.
28 March 2024
To Messrs Brotherton and Davis, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
Judging by the article published yesterday in the Law Society Gazette, you are not alone!
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/demand-for-ombudsman-surges-as-firms-fail-to-resolve-complaints/5119211.article
28 March 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I will be providing you with full replies to your queries soon, we have been dealing with a significant number of completions this week before we finish for the Easter Break today.
I am reviewing all replies received and your emails and will be in touch upon return to the office on Tuesday.
29 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Thank you for your email. If you consider that a meeting would be a more efficient and effective way of dealing with the matters I have raised, Margaret and I would be available on a day and at a time to suit you from Tuesday 2 April 2024 onwards.
4 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
The issues that remain, which haven’t been discussed and remain unresolved, include:
4 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I am currently drafting my response, and this should be with you by close of business tomorrow.
5 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I attach for your attention a copy of the Law Society Form TA7, The Leasehold Information Form 2023, which is freely available online.
I have also copied the following description from the internet: “Form TA7 is designed to ensure that the Leaseholder (the seller) provide the buyer (via the buyer’s conveyancer) with all of the information they need in relation to the lease and the associated management of the property. The TA7 is split into the following sections:-
Please let me know precisely why I don’t have a copy of this form, completed by the seller. It would have saved me a great deal of time, patience and writing to ask for this information to be supplied. After 5 weeks, all I have had are forms TA6 and TA10.
5 April 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
The Fittings and Contents Form: The Fittings and Contents form is the Law Society’s standard protocol form which must be completed by the seller and then provided to the buyer’s solicitor for the buyer on the sale of any property. It cannot accommodate every item that is potentially being left in a property. It does provide an extensive list of items – freestanding and fixed which are normally found in properties for the seller to mark as included or excluded.
If the seller is leaving more items than usual which are not listed for marking on the Fittings and Contents form, we class the property as ‘sold as seen’ and the fittings and contents essentially become yours on completion of the purchase.
The seller could provide their own inventory list of the additional items they are leaving within the property that are not listed on the Fittings and Contents form if you wish but he may be unable to account for everything if he is currently living abroad in Japan and cannot check the property itself.
The seller has confirmed in their replies to enquiries that “so far as he is aware all the appliances ‘work fine’.” Mr Deane says that he is providing all the appliances free of charge and says that if there is a problem this would mean that the appliances would need to be removed and disposed of. Any replacement would be the responsibility of the buyer.
Other Queries in this email: There is a separate leasehold information form but as there is no official management company established it would be fruitless in having the seller complete this as it would ask for management company Articles of Association, service charge amounts, basic questions which could only really be responded to by an established management company. I believe if it was to be sent to him, he would return it not fully completed and there is no set management structure nor present landlord.
Property Information Form: Whilst you are taking over the lease, you will be owning the property. You are purchasing the property which is held under a leasehold title at HM Land Registry.
2:1: As part of our initial enquiries, we asked the seller’s solicitor the following question: “In relation to the seller’s response to 2.1 of Form TA6 (Property Information form), please provide us with full details and if action has been taken to resolve the issue with the other flat owner. Please ask the seller to confirm if the issue is causing them any hindrance to accessing the property or their related garage”.
Seller Response: “Mr Deane has confirmed this is no longer any hindrance. The owner of Flat 15C now parks his works vehicle on the road in front of the apartment. There is no problem accessing the garage.”
The seller’s solicitor has previously stated to me the following: “Our client tells us that maintenance at the property is carried out on an ad hoc basis as agreed with each of the four flat owners/leaseholders. Our client tells us the Buyer’s, your clients, are aware of the practise for maintenance and repairs”.
The final three paragraphs: I would need to look into this further however given the violent temper and previous issues with 15C the seller may be reluctant to engage in asking him to remove the CCTV cameras. Furthermore, it may turn into a litigation situation, and it could be a lengthy and drawn-out process which will delay the completion of your purchase or if you were to take this on after completion would cost you in legal fees. The CCTV cameras would not be a police matter as it would class as a civil matter between you and 15C however as one of the cameras is aimed at 15D’s front door, this could be argued as a potential breach of your rights to privacy, and you could inform 15C the camera is to be removed.
I have gone back to the seller’s solicitor asking if the seller has ever approached Flat 15C to have this CCTV camera removed and await their response.
The problems with the missing Freehold Title, the missing Freeholder, the terms of the lease being ignored, the lack of a management structure, the lack of buildings insurance for the property as a whole, and the police-recorded physical abuse in the past, by and on the leaseholder in flat 15C. Indemnity policy attached. The issue with the freehold and the violence from 15C I note we spoke about on your previous matter where I provided advice in obtaining the freehold to the property.
This is a matter perhaps for the absent freeholder, but the boundary to the west of property is ill-defined and the narrow strip of land beyond it has been simply occupied and fenced off by a neighbour whose Property Title is not available on the Land Registry. This would be a separate issue and would potentially be an adverse possession matter and there would be some difficulties with the absent landlord.
I understand your concerns however in a purchase transaction we would expect the seller to provide information regarding the property to the best of their knowledge, it is the situation here where we actually have more information as you already live in one of the properties.
I would also ask you not to be concerned that you are not involved in the purchase of the flat. Any property purchase transaction carried out starts with us receiving the draft contract pack, we review this, raise our initial enquiries, and then send our client the protocol forms and title plan to the property. Our client reviews the documents and as you have done, can raise any enquiries they feel are missing from what the seller has provided, some of these may have already been raised by us but those that have not we can then raise with the seller’s solicitor as additional enquiries.
We then await replies to enquiries and once all replies have been received including additional enquiries, we put together a Property Report for our client, this includes all the information we have obtained from enquiries and the draft contract pack documents which include title registers, plans, protocol forms, any guarantees for anything in the property and if a leasehold property, the lease. The Property Report does include a breakdown of the lease and the covenants which need to be adhered to, it also flags any issues we need to make the buyer aware of such as the absent freeholder and the issues with Flat 15C. It is not standard practice to go through all documentation we receive with the buyer until all enquiries are responded to so we can give the buyer a full picture and they can then make the decision of proceeding to completion and confirm to us any completion dates they have in mind.
7 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Thank you for your detailed responses copied below. The only remaining issue is the missing Law Society Leasehold form TA7, all the other matters so far having been dealt with.
I only learned of the existence of the TA7 coincidentally, in an article about leasehold reform in the Guardian early last Friday, 5 April 2024. Reading more on the Law Society website, it is clear that I should have seen a copy of that form as completed by the seller.
From the Law Society website I also learned that if you are using the Law Society’s Conveyancing Protocol as part of CQS-accreditation or otherwise, or if there is another protocol that also assures quality, TA7 should always be given to the seller of a leasehold property by their conveyancer. This should be done at the same time as TA 6 and TA10 are given. Non-CQS practitioners do not have to use the protocol, but it is considered best practice to follow it as closely as possible. And for the protocol to be fully effective, its use needs to be agreed between the two conveyancers. One conveyancer can still use the protocol if the other does not agree to follow it.
The excuse that TA7 didn’t need to be completed because the seller couldn’t complete it is the precise reason why it should be completed. This would place on record exactly what the issues are with the lease, etc. The secondary excuse that, in any case, I already knew all about the leasehold/freehold difficulties etc, is barely credible. As the purchaser I should not be left with all the problems after completion, whilst the seller does not even have to mention them. And you should be looking after my interests, not those of the seller. Who in buying a car is assumed to know what is wrong with it whilst the seller need say nothing?
I did ask you to let me know precisely why I don’t have a copy of form TA7, completed by the seller. There are many questions: who decided that TA7 didn’t need to be issued, and when? Was TA7 given to the seller and only abandoned when he couldn’t complete it satisfactorily? Did the seller’s conveyancer decide not to use TA7? Did she already know that I knew about the leasehold problems? How did she know? Did she consult another solicitor at Haworth Brotherton, who had advised my wife Margaret on these issues in 2020 when she inherited flat 15B? When did you know that there was not to be a TA7, since you must have been expecting it? Did you agree with the seller’s conveyancer in deciding not to use it? When did you decide not to tell me about it? Did you think or hope that I may never have known that TA7 even existed? That would have been the case, had I not conducted my own due diligence.
Alma Deane, mother of the seller Philip Deane, lived in the flat for nearly 30 years and was truly obsessed with the freehold problems and the bullying activities of her neighbour in flat 15C. I believe that the seller’s conveyancer, Ms Soliman, has been the Deane family solicitor for many years and would have been quite aware of all these issues. How much I knew would have been hearsay to her, and she could have either advised Philip Deane not to complete the TA7, or not issued it in the first place. Any part of that would have required your collusion.
I do not regard it as professional for either conveyancer to import and rely on information from quite separate earlier cases, rather than hearing directly from the seller who was not involved in those cases. It was my wife Margaret, the sole leaseholder for flat 15B, who was enquiring after the missing freehold title etc in 2022.
The problems with the leasehold etc have had a dramatic effect on the value of these four flats. It’s a key feature. The only sale in 30 years, flat 15C, was bought for £99,000 in 2008, so no increase in 16 years. However, a pair of inferior 2-bedroom flats in the same avenue sold in 2024 for £118,000 and £120,000.
I hope that you can co-operate in resolving this issue, ensuring that the TA7 is completed by the seller and a copy sent to me in due course.
9 April 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I've responded to the comments on the forms and signed the contracts. I posted the contracts to Janet Soliman two weeks ago, she informed me last week that she has received them.
12 April 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
In relation to Form TA7, the seller’s solicitor has apologised as she omitted the completed form in error when sending us the contract pack. I attach hereto the completed TA7 Form from the seller.
The seller has responded to the additional enquiries we have raised with them, and I have set these out below showing the question asked and the seller’s response.
In relation to the seller's response at 2.2 of Form TA6, my client has queried this stating "there are still a lot of issues with the person occupying Flat 15C, who is firmly of the opinion that he owns all the ground surrounding his flat, he reacts violently and with foul-mouthed threats if anyone walks or drives within this area, which he monitors with at least 9 CCTV cameras. According to my client more recently, the seller was given a formal warning by the police after an incident with Flat 15C. My client has also stated there would be an issue as there is an absentee freeholder. Please can you ask the seller to clarify.
Response: “There was an incident with the owner (Mr. Robert Murphy) of 15 C when I visited my mother two years ago. It was a storm in a tea-cup so to speak and the police were called. However since then there has been no issues and he has not reacted violently towards me. Actually, two years ago, it was me that reacted violently towards him, that’s why the police gave me a caution. On the other hand, he has recently repaired the drive way and replaced some of the fencing at his own cost, and now parks his work van on the road, not at the rear of the property. So I feel he has softened his tone somewhat. Yes, he has installed security cameras, he is somewhat paranoid that someone may steel his car. I’ve never had any issues using the driveway. So as far as I’m concerned there are no outstanding issues with Robert Murphy. Although, I totally agree he is a difficult person to get along with.” **
(** I note the seller did not address the absent freeholder issue further.**)
In relation to the seller's response to 8.1 of Form TA6, my client is querying this response as he has stated “there are no arrangements at all to share costs of any kind. Flat 15B and 15D funded matters such as matching new guttering, downpipes, soffits, facias, etc. 158 funded tarmacking, new garage roof, tree trimming, repairs to wrought iron gate etc. The leaseholders of Flats 15A and 15C funded nothing". Please can you ask the seller to clarify:
In relation to the seller's response to 8.3 of Form TA6, my client has referred back to the behaviour of Flat 15C.
In relation to the seller's response to 8.6 of Form TA6, my client has queried the response and believes the answer should be ‘Yes' as "access is defined and restricted by the terms of the lease".
My client has stated Flat 15C has many CCTV cameras placed around the building including a camera aimed at the door to Flat 15D. Please can you advise if the seller has ever approached the occupier of 15C to ask them to remove this as it could be seen as an invasion of privacy.
Responses: 3.1. Mr. Robert Murphy (15C), stated that he will maintain the ground floor areas, which includes driveway, fencing and gardens. To the best of my knowledge he is doing this and has recently repaired the driveway and replaced several fencing panels at his cost. He also maintains the front gardens and hedge.
3.2. Yes, this is true. The driveways are shared access under the terms of the lease. May be I misunderstood the question.
3.3. I do not believe my mother raised this issue of security cameras and I have not raised this issue with Mr. Murphy. I was not aware that one of the cameras is aimed at the door of 15C. However, as the front doors of 15D and 15C are right next to each other this may well be the case.
The seller’s solicitor has also confirmed she is holding the signed Contract and Transfer Deed and awaits hearing from us as soon as we are ready to propose a date for completion.
I look forward to hearing from you on the above and attached TA7 Form.
(to be continued)
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I'll contact a solicitor today and confirm the process and projected time lines.
Could you let me know which solicitor you'll be using so I can contact a different firm.
21 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
Our solicitor/conveyancer would be either PHH in Cleveleys who hold our wills, or Anthony Davis at Hayworth Brotherton in Cleveleys.
21 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Understood. I’ll go ahead and meet my solicitor anyway as I need to appoint one.
23 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
The address of our solicitor/conveyancer is: Anthony Davis, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors, etc.
23 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Thank you very much for letting me know we can proceed. My solicitors contact details are: Janet Soliman, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors, etc.
23 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
You'll see from the exchange of emails below dated 21 February 2024 that we would use either PHH or Haworth Brotherton. This afternoon we wrote to tell you we are using Anthony Davis at Haworth Brotherton, after visiting and speaking to him this morning.
So we are now at the same firm, albeit with a different person! It is a big advantage to both you and ourselves that we use Anthony Davis at Haworth Brotherton, since he knows us, is completely familiar with the missing freehold problems and the problematic neighbour, and will not raise these as issues.
23 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I missed that. I'll ask my solicitor's advice. I'm sure she can recommend someone.
24 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
On Wednesday 21 February 2024 we emailed Philip Deane, the seller of the flat at 15D Rossendale Avenue South, that we would approach you to act for us. Following our conversation with you on Friday 23 February 2024 we confirmed to him by email that you would be acting for us. He had asked for this information so that we did not have a clash of solicitors.
Replying to our emails (but clearly not having read them), Philip Deane emailed later on Friday 23rd that he had appointed your colleague Janet Soliman to act for him! We mention this in case Ms Soliman approaches you for clarification on this matter. We have made it clear to Philip Deane that we prefer to have you, not least because of your prior knowledge of the freehold issues.
26 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for your email. There is indeed a clash. I spoke with our Janet Soliman, who has confirmed what you say. In the circumstances and due to the increased risk of a conflict of interest, we would not be able to act for you and Mr Deane. Best of luck with the purchase!
26 February 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
Our two putative solicitors at Haworth Brotherton have met and decided neither wants to represent either of us! Davis used the excuse 'clash of interest'. We have now appointed Fylde Law to act for us.
26 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Please let us know how a conflict of interest arises for you, given that Philip Deane will appoint a solicitor from a different firm. He acknowledges the error: on Friday 23 February 2024 at 18.39 he wrote: "Ooops. I missed that. I'll ask my solicitor's advice. I'm sure she can recommend someone."
26 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for coming back to me. I can understand your confusion, however, when I spoke with our Mrs Soliman, she confirmed we had been instructed (to act for the Seller). I will clarify and come back to you asap.
26 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I’ll contact Janet (Soliman) and clarify her concerns. I’ll also ask her to recommend another firm, other than Fylde Law.
26 February 2024
From Jeanette Critchley, Legal Secretary, Fylde Law
Thank you for your instructions. I will now arrange for a file to be opened and for our initial client care paperwork to be with you in the next few days.
26 February 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Just telephoned Janet Soliman at Haworth Brotherton. She has agreed to represent me for the sale and conveyancing of 15D. I mentioned the email you received from Anthony, she said that as there is no estate agent, Anthony felt it was better for you to use a different solicitor. I've no idea how or why they came to that conclusion. I didn't press her.
She's very happy to continue and work with Fylde law, she seems very familiar with them.
26 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Philip Deane, the seller of the flat, has just let me know that Janet Soliman is acting for him.
27 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for confirming. Best of luck with everything!
27 February 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Regrettably from my point of view there is now more to consider. The flat seller, Philip Deane, has written as follows:
“She (Janet Soliman) has agreed to represent me for the sale and conveyancing of 15D.
I mentioned the email you received from Anthony, she said that as there is no estate agent, Anthony felt it was better for you to use a different solicitor. I've no idea how or why they came to that conclusion. I didn't press her.”
I have no idea either. It seems that Janet Soliman has appropriated one of your clients with an irrational justification, a client with whom you had already reached an agreement, had promised to send cost details of the conveyancing process and agreed to look again at the process of reconstituting the freehold title.
There is another relevant ambiguity (if that is the right word). In your email of 26 February 2024, you wrote: “I spoke with our Janet Soliman, who has confirmed what you say. In the circumstances and due to the increased risk of a conflict of interest, we would not be able to act for you and Mr Deane.” I took this to mean that neither of you would act for either of us (self and Philip Deane) and I informed Philip accordingly. But on the same day, on the telephone, Ms Soliman agreed to act for him.
I don’t know what was meant by “Janet Soliman, who has confirmed what you say”. I said that I preferred your services, that I had informed Philip Deane in advance of his approach to Janet Soliman, and that he agreed to seek an alternative representative. All of this is in writing.
In wondering why this is happening, Margaret recalled that Alma Deane, Philip’s mother, had mentioned in conversation that she had used Janet Soliman (by name) on occasion on matters to do with the lease, etc. It may be that Ms Soliman is dealing with Alma’s will, perhaps dealing with probate and maybe as her executor. From a cost and convenience point of view, this would go well with the sale of the flat, which was the centre piece of her estate. There is also a second property in Spain, inherited by Philip’s brother Graeme, which itself may be sold later in the year.
Haworth Brotherton have a very thorough complaints procedure which encourages resolution at this early stage. What I need is the complete and honest explanation of what has been happening and an apology for the inconvenience it has caused.
27 February 2024
From the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Thank you for your email. I am sorry that you feel inconvenienced, however, in the circumstances my approach is correct – SRA rules do not allow me/us to act for more than one party in a transaction where there is a significant risk of a conflict of interests. Mr Deane has formally instructed this firm to act for him. I expect this is due to Janet Soliman’s longstanding prior involvement with the family’s affairs, as you refer to below. Your email of Saturday 24th February 2024 @ 5.14pm confirmed Mr Deane had appointed Janet Soliman and on reading your email on Monday morning, I discussed with Mrs Soliman and promptly advised you of the increased risk of a conflict of interest and that we cannot act for you both.
1 March 2024
To the Haworth Brotherton Solicitor, Anthony Davis
Not ‘inconvenienced’, I feel personally insulted by your response. It is obvious and quite clear that it would have been a conflict of interest. What is objectionable is the manner in which that conflict arose quite deliberately and knowingly by yourself and Ms Soliman. She initiated it and you condoned it. As you know the seller apologised for the conflict, as we had engaged your services first for good reasons, and he agreed to seek another conveyancer. Ms Soliman convinced him otherwise for her own benefit and convenience, using the absence of an estate agent as an unusual excuse, leaving us to find another conveyancer.
Perhaps you welcomed the opportunity to use the artificially created conflict of interest as an opportunity to abruptly drop the case you had started. There was an obvious reluctance on your part concerning the problematic conveyancing and the possible recreation of the freehold title. But you had agreed to take it on.
I particularly didn’t like your phrase ‘Best of luck with the purchase!’ as you abandoned me to find another conveyancer, with the subsequent need to go through a lengthy description of all the problems with the purchase of the flat. The conveyancer would search the Land Registry for the freehold title and find nothing. How would the conveyancer know if the seller’s solicitor was being completely frank about all the issues with the flat, including the history of disputes and assaults?
I do need the opinion of a third party on what has ensued which is, to say the least, based on quite unprofessional behaviour. Therefore, I proceed to the second stage of Haworth Brotherton’s complaints procedure with a chronologically arranged report.
2 March 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I submitted the documents to Janet Soliman yesterday, so the ball is now rolling.
5 March 2024
From Andrew Brotherton, Client Care Partner, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
Thank you for your email dated 1st March 2024 addressed to my colleague and partner Mr Anthony Davis, the contents of which are noted.
I am very sorry to read that you feel personally insulted by Mr Davis’s response to your earlier emails. I can assure you that this was not his intention. Whilst I note that you have very strong feelings about this matter, I must advise that I cannot agree with your claim that either Mr Davis or Mrs Soliman have acted either unprofessionally or inappropriately in this matter. I do not agree that any person at this office has “artificially created a conflict of interest” to your detriment, that is simply not the case.
All solicitors are required to objectively assess the potential for conflicts of interest at the start of any potential transaction. The test is an objective assessment taking into account the facts known about the transaction at the time of making the assessment. The assessment is not made against any particular potential client, but rather for the benefit of any potential client. There is no single objective test to determine whether or not there is a conflict of interest, it is a judgement for each solicitor and firm of solicitors in each and every transaction. I am satisfied that both Mr Davis and Mrs Soliman have properly assessed the potential for risk in this matter.
I understand that you are in agreement that there would have been a conflict of interests in this firm acting for both parties in this transaction. I further understand that whilst you accept that there would have been a conflict of interests, that you were not pleased in the way you were advised of the outcome of the assessment, and as a result of which you have asked us to provide a chronology of events.
Further to your specific request I can confirm the chronology of events is as follows:-
- On 21st February 2024 at 11:40 am Mrs Soliman received a telephone enquiry from Mr Deane with regard to the prospective sale of 15D Rossendale Avenue South. A client care letter was issued to Mr Deane by Mrs Soliman the same day.
- On 21st February 2024 at 14:13 we received an email enquiry to our “Enquiries” email box from yourself regarding a purchase.
- On Friday, 23rd February 2024 Mr Davis discussed with you your intention to buy 15D Rossendale Avenue South and he said that he would be happy to assist you. He further advised that he would send you an estimate and have a look at the papers relating to the freehold.
- On Saturday, 24th February 2024 you emailed Mr Davis confirming that Mr Deane had appointed our firm (Mrs Soliman) to act for him. Mr Davis has confirmed to me that he was not aware of this prior to receiving your email (which he opened on Monday morning).
- On Monday, 26th February 2024 Mr Davis discussed the situation with Mrs Soliman. Mr Davis then emailed you promptly at 9:55 am to advise that we could not act for you and Mr Deane because of the potential risk of conflict. Mr Davis ended his email to you wishing you the best of luck which was meant with all sincerity. I am very sorry if this was received by you not as he had intended.
- At 18:59 on Monday, 26th February 2024 you acknowledged Mr Davis’s earlier email, stating that Mr Deane had confirmed to you that he had instructed this firm; you also advised him that you had found and instructed another solicitor.
I am sorry that you have found it necessary to raise a formal complaint, but I cannot agree that either Mr Davis or Mrs Soliman have acted either inappropriately or unprofessionally in this matter. I note that at the point of advising you that we could not act on your behalf in this matter on account of a potential for conflict of interest, Mr Davis had not yet provided you with an estimate of costs, nor had he opened a file in your name in this matter, nor had he issued you with a client care letter and so had not received your completed instruction documentation to formally appoint us as your legal representative to act on your behalf in this matter.
I do hope that this email helps in explaining the process which has been undertaken in assessing the risks and the needs of all clients and potential clients in this matter.
Whilst I am sure you might still feel let down I can assure you that the assessment of potential for conflict of interest is not to be taken personally against any party, but simply has to take into account the facts and circumstances of each and every case.
I agree with the outcome of the assessment made by my colleagues in that it is in your best interests that you have the benefit of independent legal advice in your proposed purchase of this property.
If you still remain dissatisfied with the handling of your complaint you can ask the Legal Ombudsman to consider the complaint. The Legal Ombudsman can be contacted at P O Box 6806, Wolverhampton WV1 9WJ; Telephone:- 0300 555 0333; Website:- www.legalombudsman.org.uk.
5 March 2024
To Andrew Brotherton, Client Care Partner, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
The following attachment was forwarded:
The Haworth Brotherton Complaints Procedure
I could complain that you are not following your own complaints procedure, starting with paragraph 1. And what happened to paragraphs 2 to 4? To remind you:
1.If the matter cannot be resolved after a conversation or initial correspondence, you may progress your complaint to our Client Care Partner – Andrew Brotherton.
2.We will record your complaint in our central register and open a separate file for your complaint.
3.A letter will be sent to you acknowledging your complaint within 5 workings days. We will tell you how long it will take us to investigate your complaint. This normally takes around three to four weeks, but it could be less or more (either due to the circumstances of your complaint, illness or holidays). In any event this should never be more than eight weeks after acknowledging receipt of your complaint.
4.Your complaint will be investigated. This will normally involve the following steps:-
· We will review your file and if necessary talk to the person dealing with your case.
· We will send you the result of our investigation by post or email.
· We may invite you to a meeting to discuss your complaint and hopefully resolve it.
· We will write to you to confirm what took place and any solutions we have agreed with you.
I have not progressed my complaint to the Client Care Partner yet. I may decide not to; it is a basic assumption in any complaints procedure that the customer, the complainant, is in charge of the process at each stage. It is, after all, their complaint and their responsibility to frame it, which I have yet to do.
I will of course read carefully what you have written, but you have made it very difficult to formulate my version of the complaint when you have so fully defended the two staff members involved, and already drawn your conclusion. Without having heard from me.
For example, on Sunday 3rd March 2024 I had a long and very fruitful meeting with the seller of the property in question, Philip Deane, before he returned to Japan today. This helped my to see the situation from his point of view, which is also important. After all, it is the client who chooses the solicitor and not the other way round!
A key factor for me has been that of professional behaviour; I myself having worked at a senior professional level in higher education. Should the matter now be moved on to the third stage in the procedure, I will not have had an opportunity to explain just what the complaint is. For example, the matter is not whether there was a conflict of interest, of course there was, but who created it and why? And why was I so unceremoniously dumped with a brusque ‘Good Luck’?
5. At this stage, if you are still not satisfied you should contact us again. We will then arrange to review our decision. This will happen in one of the following ways:-
· Another partner in the firm will review the Client Care Partner’s decision within ten days.
· We will invite you to agree to independent mediation within five days. We will let you know how long this process will take.
There is no indication in your complaints procedure of any time limit before the complaint is presented to the Client Care Partner. We know from experience that the Legal Ombudsman expects “complaints to be made to them within one year of the date of the act or omission about which you are concerned.” They are not in a hurry.
From Andrew Brotherton, Client Care Partner, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
I thank you for your email dated 5th March 2024 together with attachment. I note your comments but I have nothing to add to the content of my email to you sent on Tuesday 5th March 2024.
6 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
You should note that the Freehold Title is lost and missing, the Freeholder is absent and the terms of the Lease are being widely ignored. There is no management structure and no comprehensive insurance for the whole property of four flats, with each leaseholder responsible for their own insurance. There is also a history of disputes between leaseholders, leading to violence and police intervention on two separate occasions. The last one occurred on 27th March 2022 when the seller of 15D, Philip Deane, attracted a police record (no formal charges) for an alleged assault on the leaseholder of 15C. This same leaseholder of 15C assaulted me earlier, on 6 April 2020. Although I didn’t press charges, a Common Assault Case Number was created and the leaseholder given a formal police warning.
The seller is aware of all this and should report it, and Laura may be aware of it from the help she gave to me and my wife in March 2022 in tracing the freehold of 15B. I accept all these issues, given the very reasonable price.
13 March 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I have now reviewed the contract pack sent to us by the seller's solicitor and have sent them my initial enquiries.
14 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
We can make an immediate response to the Plan and the Contents Form, but the Property Information Form will take a little longer since it rides rather roughshod over any issue relating to its leasehold status without a Freehold Title, a Freeholder, a functioning lease, a management structure and continuing disputes with another leaseholder. We question the validity of the Property Information for another potential purchaser with no prior knowledge of the situation. We don't know if Philip Deane's solicitor, Janet Soliman, had sufficient knowledge to be in a position to guide Philip. More details a little later.
The Contents Form: It is not clear what is meant by 'contents' other than them being more than fittings and fixtures. I mention this because Philip left the flat fully furnished and equipped, other than he and his brother removing purely personal items. Should all this content be listed in order for me to become their legal owner, otherwise how do I explain where they all came from?
Overall, I think there should be a separate form altogether for leasehold flats.
15 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Further to my email of 14 March 2024, copied below, I am writing on the subject of the Property Information Form. I also acknowledge the receipt of the EPC, which has a quite acceptable rating of C, although I would query it on two points. There is cavity wall insulation (although the seller may not have known that) and the floor, rather being ‘non/applicable, is very well insulated by the heated flat below!
The Property Information Form: This has been filled in as if what was being sold/bought was the ‘ownership’ of a ‘property’, rather than the lease (the ‘right to occupy’) of a leasehold flat, one of four in a building and grounds owned by a freeholder. Several questions have been answered that would relate only to the freehold, whilst the issues of the missing Freehold Title etc are not mentioned. This is illustrated by the first question:
1 This whole section (Boundaries) should have been left blank.
2.1 The dispute is ongoing. Robert Murphy, the occupant of Flat 15C (below the flat to be purchased), is firmly of the opinion that he owns all the ground surrounding his flat, which is half of the total ground on which the four flats stand. He reacts violently and with foul-mouthed threats if anyone walks or drives within this area, which he monitors with at least 9 external CCTV cameras.
2.2 The situation described at 2.1 remains unresolved and the situation with the absentee freeholder also remains unresolved.
6.1 This depends on what is meant by ‘the property’. Each leaseholder is responsible for insuring their flat, but there is no freeholder nor any management structure that insures the building as whole, the grounds, the garages, etc.
6.3 There is no landlord!
8.1 This is just not true. There are no arrangements at all to share costs of any kind. My wife Margaret in flat 15B and Alma Deane, leaseholder of flat 15D for nearly 30 years, funded matters such as matching new guttering, downpipes, soffits, facias, etc. Margaret funded tarmacking, new garage roof, tree trimming, repairs to wrought iron gate, etc. The leaseholders of flats 15A and 15C funded nothing.
8.2 The lease gives each leaseholder the right of ingress and egress to their own garage by car, although the leaseholder of flat 15C forcibly prevents this on that side of the property.
8.3 The answer is Yes in the ways described so far!
8.6 The answer is Yes. Access is defined and restricted by the terms of the lease (see plan with colours).
9.1 The terms of the lease prohibit parking within the grounds, although access to the individual garages is permitted.
10.1 By answering ‘No’ this is another of several ways of not acknowledging that this is a leasehold flat with no management structure of any kind. The lease requires a small annual ground-rental fee to be paid to the landlord; the reason why it isn’t paid is that there is no landlord.
Summary: The effect of the absent Freehold Title, Freeholder and Management Structure, along with the non-imposition of the terms of the lease, underlie many of the answers on this form. But without the underlying causes being mentioned, a potential buyer who did not know the true situation would be completely misled. I am concerned that the seller’s solicitor was not aware of this, or let it pass.
Overall, as a purchaser, fortunately I know what I am buying, but I do need this to be fully and honestly stated and defined in what is or will be a legal document.
19 March 2024
To the Seller, Philip Deane
The solicitor has passed on to us the Property Information Form and the Fittings and Contents Form, as well as the EPC and the Land Registry Plan. We have made some comments particularly on the Property Information Form in order to clarify the distinction between what is being purchased (the lease) and the rest of it (the freehold). This is to pre-empt any issues that may arise from later searches, particularly of the Land Registry.
19 March 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
Please let me know if you need any additional information or if there's anything I can do to facilitate the transition of ownership.
20 March 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Whilst you are able to communicate directly with the seller, I must advise that I can only take instructions from their solicitor and send any further enquiries through them.
21 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I understand the kind of protocols that solicitors and conveyancers have to follow and I did not assume that you could or would want to communicate directly with the seller, but I did regard it as an advantage for me.
For example, I had a number of comments and questions about the completed Property Information Form and the Fittings and Contents Form, to which you made no response. I don’t know in what form the comments were passed to the seller’s conveyancer, or how she might communicate with the seller. And him back to her. And she back to you. And you to me.
Given the complexity and delicacy of the freehold and leasehold problems and the range and quality of the contents remaining in the flat, it is very important that I can directly reassure the seller over any doubts or misunderstandings that may arise. Thus far he has been extremely generous and helpful and I do not want to lose that through miscommunication.
27 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I am increasingly concerned that I am not involved in the purchase of the flat for which you are undertaking the conveyancing. A month ago, on 26 February 2024, Jeanette Crutchley emailed details of your costs, which I agreed the same day, and a file was opened at Fylde Law. Since then, I have given you full details about myself as a prospective purchaser and replied with comments when you forwarded the seller’s completed Property Information Form, the Fittings and Contents Form, etc.
There has been no mention that I am proposing to purchase a lease, rather than a property, with all the extra complexities in this particular case. The lease is in two rather similar parts; the first is a contract between the freeholder and the leaseholder; the second is a contract among the four leaseholders. There is no freehold title, there is no freeholder and there are no agreements among the leaseholders. Indeed, the terms of the lease are largely being ignored. So can the lease have any legal standing in these circumstances? What am I buying? Please advise me.
On another matter, four years ago a solicitor pointed out an unusual feature of the lease for the two upstairs properties (15B and 15D). The First Schedule on page 14 of the lease (see extract below) defines those parts of the property demised to these two leaseholders. They include the external walls, floors and ceilings, joists and roof space, all of which usually remain the responsibility of the freeholder.
The external wall of flat 15D has fixed to it aerials, satellite dishes and cables belonging to the leaseholder of flat 15C. They were erected without prior notice, consent or agreement with the previous long-term leaseholder of flat 15D, Mrs Alma Deane, who was absent in Spain at the time. Also, fixed on three sides of flat 15C and its garage, there are twelve recording CCTV cameras, one of which is aimed at the front door of flat 15D. No-one would buy a dwelling that has such intrusions into the privacy of themselves, visitors and tradespeople, or have their own walls strung with a neighbour’s aerials, satellite dishes and cables.
Please advise me on what action might be taken before completion, or included in the contract, that would make it the responsibility of the seller’s conveyancer to correct this situation, which should not in any way be a matter for me. We can then agree on an instruction to the seller’s solicitor.
28 March 2024
To Messrs Brotherton and Davis, Haworth Brotherton Solicitors
Judging by the article published yesterday in the Law Society Gazette, you are not alone!
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/demand-for-ombudsman-surges-as-firms-fail-to-resolve-complaints/5119211.article
28 March 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I will be providing you with full replies to your queries soon, we have been dealing with a significant number of completions this week before we finish for the Easter Break today.
I am reviewing all replies received and your emails and will be in touch upon return to the office on Tuesday.
29 March 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Thank you for your email. If you consider that a meeting would be a more efficient and effective way of dealing with the matters I have raised, Margaret and I would be available on a day and at a time to suit you from Tuesday 2 April 2024 onwards.
4 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
The issues that remain, which haven’t been discussed and remain unresolved, include:
- Making it clear that what is being sold is a lease and not a property; a lease with a number of associated problems.
- All the comments I made on the way in which the Property Information Form and the Fittings and Contents Form were inadequately completed.
- Information on which of those comments were passed to the seller’s conveyancer and what responses if any have there been.
- The problems with the missing Freehold Title, the missing Freeholder, the terms of the lease being ignored, the lack of a management structure, the lack of buildings insurance for the property as a whole, and the police-recorded physical abuse in the past, by and on the leaseholder in flat 15C.
- Confirmation that the seller has taken out an Absent Landlord Indemnity Insurance Policy which will be assigned to the new leaseholder.
- The legal status (the ownership) of the high-quality furnishings and household goods left in flat 15D.
- Removal of the aerials, satellite dishes and cables belonging to flat 15C, which are attached to the wall which is demised in the lease to flat D.
- The twelve intrusive CCTV recording cameras covering all the land around the flat at ground level, which belong to flat 15C.
- This is a matter perhaps for the absent freeholder, but the boundary to the west of property is ill-defined and the narrow strip of land beyond it has been simply occupied and fenced off by a neighbour whose Property Title is not available on the Land Registry.
4 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I am currently drafting my response, and this should be with you by close of business tomorrow.
5 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
I attach for your attention a copy of the Law Society Form TA7, The Leasehold Information Form 2023, which is freely available online.
I have also copied the following description from the internet: “Form TA7 is designed to ensure that the Leaseholder (the seller) provide the buyer (via the buyer’s conveyancer) with all of the information they need in relation to the lease and the associated management of the property. The TA7 is split into the following sections:-
- “The Property – type (eg flat); is there an annual rent
- Ownership and Management – who are the owners and who manages the property
- Relevant Documents – eg lease; managing agent correspondence; insurance
- Contact Details – of freeholder and managing agents
- Maintenance & Service Charges – details around work done and due to be done
- Notices – about selling or improving/maintaining the property
- Consents – regarding changes to leases
- Complaints – between or about freeholder, management company or neighbour(s)
- Alterations – since the lease was granted
- Enfranchisement – the right of a tenant to buy the freehold
- Building safety, cladding, and the leaseholder deed of certificate”
Please let me know precisely why I don’t have a copy of this form, completed by the seller. It would have saved me a great deal of time, patience and writing to ask for this information to be supplied. After 5 weeks, all I have had are forms TA6 and TA10.
5 April 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
The Fittings and Contents Form: The Fittings and Contents form is the Law Society’s standard protocol form which must be completed by the seller and then provided to the buyer’s solicitor for the buyer on the sale of any property. It cannot accommodate every item that is potentially being left in a property. It does provide an extensive list of items – freestanding and fixed which are normally found in properties for the seller to mark as included or excluded.
If the seller is leaving more items than usual which are not listed for marking on the Fittings and Contents form, we class the property as ‘sold as seen’ and the fittings and contents essentially become yours on completion of the purchase.
The seller could provide their own inventory list of the additional items they are leaving within the property that are not listed on the Fittings and Contents form if you wish but he may be unable to account for everything if he is currently living abroad in Japan and cannot check the property itself.
The seller has confirmed in their replies to enquiries that “so far as he is aware all the appliances ‘work fine’.” Mr Deane says that he is providing all the appliances free of charge and says that if there is a problem this would mean that the appliances would need to be removed and disposed of. Any replacement would be the responsibility of the buyer.
Other Queries in this email: There is a separate leasehold information form but as there is no official management company established it would be fruitless in having the seller complete this as it would ask for management company Articles of Association, service charge amounts, basic questions which could only really be responded to by an established management company. I believe if it was to be sent to him, he would return it not fully completed and there is no set management structure nor present landlord.
Property Information Form: Whilst you are taking over the lease, you will be owning the property. You are purchasing the property which is held under a leasehold title at HM Land Registry.
2:1: As part of our initial enquiries, we asked the seller’s solicitor the following question: “In relation to the seller’s response to 2.1 of Form TA6 (Property Information form), please provide us with full details and if action has been taken to resolve the issue with the other flat owner. Please ask the seller to confirm if the issue is causing them any hindrance to accessing the property or their related garage”.
Seller Response: “Mr Deane has confirmed this is no longer any hindrance. The owner of Flat 15C now parks his works vehicle on the road in front of the apartment. There is no problem accessing the garage.”
The seller’s solicitor has previously stated to me the following: “Our client tells us that maintenance at the property is carried out on an ad hoc basis as agreed with each of the four flat owners/leaseholders. Our client tells us the Buyer’s, your clients, are aware of the practise for maintenance and repairs”.
The final three paragraphs: I would need to look into this further however given the violent temper and previous issues with 15C the seller may be reluctant to engage in asking him to remove the CCTV cameras. Furthermore, it may turn into a litigation situation, and it could be a lengthy and drawn-out process which will delay the completion of your purchase or if you were to take this on after completion would cost you in legal fees. The CCTV cameras would not be a police matter as it would class as a civil matter between you and 15C however as one of the cameras is aimed at 15D’s front door, this could be argued as a potential breach of your rights to privacy, and you could inform 15C the camera is to be removed.
I have gone back to the seller’s solicitor asking if the seller has ever approached Flat 15C to have this CCTV camera removed and await their response.
The problems with the missing Freehold Title, the missing Freeholder, the terms of the lease being ignored, the lack of a management structure, the lack of buildings insurance for the property as a whole, and the police-recorded physical abuse in the past, by and on the leaseholder in flat 15C. Indemnity policy attached. The issue with the freehold and the violence from 15C I note we spoke about on your previous matter where I provided advice in obtaining the freehold to the property.
This is a matter perhaps for the absent freeholder, but the boundary to the west of property is ill-defined and the narrow strip of land beyond it has been simply occupied and fenced off by a neighbour whose Property Title is not available on the Land Registry. This would be a separate issue and would potentially be an adverse possession matter and there would be some difficulties with the absent landlord.
I understand your concerns however in a purchase transaction we would expect the seller to provide information regarding the property to the best of their knowledge, it is the situation here where we actually have more information as you already live in one of the properties.
I would also ask you not to be concerned that you are not involved in the purchase of the flat. Any property purchase transaction carried out starts with us receiving the draft contract pack, we review this, raise our initial enquiries, and then send our client the protocol forms and title plan to the property. Our client reviews the documents and as you have done, can raise any enquiries they feel are missing from what the seller has provided, some of these may have already been raised by us but those that have not we can then raise with the seller’s solicitor as additional enquiries.
We then await replies to enquiries and once all replies have been received including additional enquiries, we put together a Property Report for our client, this includes all the information we have obtained from enquiries and the draft contract pack documents which include title registers, plans, protocol forms, any guarantees for anything in the property and if a leasehold property, the lease. The Property Report does include a breakdown of the lease and the covenants which need to be adhered to, it also flags any issues we need to make the buyer aware of such as the absent freeholder and the issues with Flat 15C. It is not standard practice to go through all documentation we receive with the buyer until all enquiries are responded to so we can give the buyer a full picture and they can then make the decision of proceeding to completion and confirm to us any completion dates they have in mind.
7 April 2024
To Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
Thank you for your detailed responses copied below. The only remaining issue is the missing Law Society Leasehold form TA7, all the other matters so far having been dealt with.
I only learned of the existence of the TA7 coincidentally, in an article about leasehold reform in the Guardian early last Friday, 5 April 2024. Reading more on the Law Society website, it is clear that I should have seen a copy of that form as completed by the seller.
From the Law Society website I also learned that if you are using the Law Society’s Conveyancing Protocol as part of CQS-accreditation or otherwise, or if there is another protocol that also assures quality, TA7 should always be given to the seller of a leasehold property by their conveyancer. This should be done at the same time as TA 6 and TA10 are given. Non-CQS practitioners do not have to use the protocol, but it is considered best practice to follow it as closely as possible. And for the protocol to be fully effective, its use needs to be agreed between the two conveyancers. One conveyancer can still use the protocol if the other does not agree to follow it.
The excuse that TA7 didn’t need to be completed because the seller couldn’t complete it is the precise reason why it should be completed. This would place on record exactly what the issues are with the lease, etc. The secondary excuse that, in any case, I already knew all about the leasehold/freehold difficulties etc, is barely credible. As the purchaser I should not be left with all the problems after completion, whilst the seller does not even have to mention them. And you should be looking after my interests, not those of the seller. Who in buying a car is assumed to know what is wrong with it whilst the seller need say nothing?
I did ask you to let me know precisely why I don’t have a copy of form TA7, completed by the seller. There are many questions: who decided that TA7 didn’t need to be issued, and when? Was TA7 given to the seller and only abandoned when he couldn’t complete it satisfactorily? Did the seller’s conveyancer decide not to use TA7? Did she already know that I knew about the leasehold problems? How did she know? Did she consult another solicitor at Haworth Brotherton, who had advised my wife Margaret on these issues in 2020 when she inherited flat 15B? When did you know that there was not to be a TA7, since you must have been expecting it? Did you agree with the seller’s conveyancer in deciding not to use it? When did you decide not to tell me about it? Did you think or hope that I may never have known that TA7 even existed? That would have been the case, had I not conducted my own due diligence.
Alma Deane, mother of the seller Philip Deane, lived in the flat for nearly 30 years and was truly obsessed with the freehold problems and the bullying activities of her neighbour in flat 15C. I believe that the seller’s conveyancer, Ms Soliman, has been the Deane family solicitor for many years and would have been quite aware of all these issues. How much I knew would have been hearsay to her, and she could have either advised Philip Deane not to complete the TA7, or not issued it in the first place. Any part of that would have required your collusion.
I do not regard it as professional for either conveyancer to import and rely on information from quite separate earlier cases, rather than hearing directly from the seller who was not involved in those cases. It was my wife Margaret, the sole leaseholder for flat 15B, who was enquiring after the missing freehold title etc in 2022.
The problems with the leasehold etc have had a dramatic effect on the value of these four flats. It’s a key feature. The only sale in 30 years, flat 15C, was bought for £99,000 in 2008, so no increase in 16 years. However, a pair of inferior 2-bedroom flats in the same avenue sold in 2024 for £118,000 and £120,000.
I hope that you can co-operate in resolving this issue, ensuring that the TA7 is completed by the seller and a copy sent to me in due course.
9 April 2024
From the Seller, Philip Deane
I've responded to the comments on the forms and signed the contracts. I posted the contracts to Janet Soliman two weeks ago, she informed me last week that she has received them.
12 April 2024
From Laura Whitaker, Buyer’s Conveyancer at Fylde Law
In relation to Form TA7, the seller’s solicitor has apologised as she omitted the completed form in error when sending us the contract pack. I attach hereto the completed TA7 Form from the seller.
The seller has responded to the additional enquiries we have raised with them, and I have set these out below showing the question asked and the seller’s response.
In relation to the seller's response at 2.2 of Form TA6, my client has queried this stating "there are still a lot of issues with the person occupying Flat 15C, who is firmly of the opinion that he owns all the ground surrounding his flat, he reacts violently and with foul-mouthed threats if anyone walks or drives within this area, which he monitors with at least 9 CCTV cameras. According to my client more recently, the seller was given a formal warning by the police after an incident with Flat 15C. My client has also stated there would be an issue as there is an absentee freeholder. Please can you ask the seller to clarify.
Response: “There was an incident with the owner (Mr. Robert Murphy) of 15 C when I visited my mother two years ago. It was a storm in a tea-cup so to speak and the police were called. However since then there has been no issues and he has not reacted violently towards me. Actually, two years ago, it was me that reacted violently towards him, that’s why the police gave me a caution. On the other hand, he has recently repaired the drive way and replaced some of the fencing at his own cost, and now parks his work van on the road, not at the rear of the property. So I feel he has softened his tone somewhat. Yes, he has installed security cameras, he is somewhat paranoid that someone may steel his car. I’ve never had any issues using the driveway. So as far as I’m concerned there are no outstanding issues with Robert Murphy. Although, I totally agree he is a difficult person to get along with.” **
(** I note the seller did not address the absent freeholder issue further.**)
In relation to the seller's response to 8.1 of Form TA6, my client is querying this response as he has stated “there are no arrangements at all to share costs of any kind. Flat 15B and 15D funded matters such as matching new guttering, downpipes, soffits, facias, etc. 158 funded tarmacking, new garage roof, tree trimming, repairs to wrought iron gate etc. The leaseholders of Flats 15A and 15C funded nothing". Please can you ask the seller to clarify:
In relation to the seller's response to 8.3 of Form TA6, my client has referred back to the behaviour of Flat 15C.
In relation to the seller's response to 8.6 of Form TA6, my client has queried the response and believes the answer should be ‘Yes' as "access is defined and restricted by the terms of the lease".
My client has stated Flat 15C has many CCTV cameras placed around the building including a camera aimed at the door to Flat 15D. Please can you advise if the seller has ever approached the occupier of 15C to ask them to remove this as it could be seen as an invasion of privacy.
Responses: 3.1. Mr. Robert Murphy (15C), stated that he will maintain the ground floor areas, which includes driveway, fencing and gardens. To the best of my knowledge he is doing this and has recently repaired the driveway and replaced several fencing panels at his cost. He also maintains the front gardens and hedge.
3.2. Yes, this is true. The driveways are shared access under the terms of the lease. May be I misunderstood the question.
3.3. I do not believe my mother raised this issue of security cameras and I have not raised this issue with Mr. Murphy. I was not aware that one of the cameras is aimed at the door of 15C. However, as the front doors of 15D and 15C are right next to each other this may well be the case.
The seller’s solicitor has also confirmed she is holding the signed Contract and Transfer Deed and awaits hearing from us as soon as we are ready to propose a date for completion.
I look forward to hearing from you on the above and attached TA7 Form.
(to be continued)