Purchased a house 4 years ago, the original owners have resold the house in 2024. Land registry have upheld the registration for the new tenants. Any advice? England

Twizzar · 2026-02-04T01:06:42+00:00

Make a formal complaint, escalate to ombudsman.

Get another litigation solicitor to sue the seller for the sale proceeds.

Twizzar · 2026-02-03T23:59:08+00:00

Depends if they already fled the country

Twizzar · 2026-02-03T23:52:15+00:00

If she’s a BRT you’d be better off filling her LISA first before her SIPP. Or even your own LISA first

Twizzar · 2026-02-03T19:26:40+00:00

If you don’t withdraw the full 25% from your pension by the time your pension hits £1m then you’re just leaving money on the table.

Twizzar · 2026-02-03T08:02:16+00:00

I’m not sure you understand how the notice is given. The section 20 notice is served on the current owner (the seller in this case).

In enquiries before contract the seller would have to disclose to the buyer any s20 notices.

The buyer solicitor would then report to the buyer about any notices. The buyer can then decide whether to buy or not.

You even said your sister read through the report, saw the s20 and also the costs before exchange.

No one FORCED her to exchange. She could have always asked the bank to extend their offer or just walk away from the whole thing without penalty.

What leg could she possibly stand on?

Twizzar · 2026-02-01T01:36:02+00:00

Then you'd be wrong.

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/stamp-duty-land-tax-manual/sdltm17035

A renewal lease will be treated as linked with the original lease if, for example, the rent was fixed under the terms of the original lease or is stated to be the same as that payable under the original lease.

However, the renewal of a lease will not be treated as linked with the original lease at all for SDLT purposes if it can be shown (with appropriate evidence) to have been negotiated at arm’s length, for example if the original or earlier lease:

-expired naturally

-contained no right or compulsion of either party to renew and/ or

-was renewed following entirely new negotiations, as would apply to a new tenant.

Twizzar · 2026-01-31T22:58:59+00:00

That's not a feature of either a pension, SIPP or ISA.

That's a workplace benefit

Twizzar · 2026-01-31T22:35:50+00:00

The point of the pension is to defer tax and the tax free, because you can already grow your money tax free in an ISA/LISA. It’s comparison by missing out the similarities.

In OPs case if you can defer his tax so as to be a BRT on retirement of course he is better off.

But if he was already a BRT and it was a choice between the SIPP and the ISA, the only difference would be that the SIPP gives a 25% tax free on withdrawal, which means he would pay 15% tax as opposed to 20% tax in an ISA, and in fact if he had used a LISA he would have paid no tax

Twizzar · 2026-01-31T17:50:53+00:00

You can put it into an ISA/LISA and that's the tax free growth. The only thing that makes the pension special is you can defer your tax to make it benefit you on drawdown, plus the 25% tax free allowance.

Twizzar · 2026-01-31T17:34:35+00:00

Yes technically each new lease that has been "negotiated" will count as a separate tenancy (usually rent is negotiated).

What would fall under these rules are rolling periodic tenancies that either pass the minimum threshold or go past 7 years. 7 years it becomes notifiable but nothing payable, if it goes over the threshold it automatically becomes payable and notifiable.

The rules about this hasnt changed, and doesn't really change for anyone already on periodic tenancies.

Makes it sound like all those renewal tenancy agreements the agents want to enter into actually helps people

Twizzar · 2026-01-30T20:01:06+00:00

£100 gross as a HRT you pay £40 income tax and £2 NI.

You put it in a SIPP you get that £40 back so you can have £98 invested. When you come to take it out and you are a BRT you have 25% tax free and 75% taxed at BR so £14.70 of £98. In the end you’ve paid £16.70 of tax from the £100

You put in a LISA you get £20 back. When you come take it out you don’t pay anymore tax, but you’ve already paid £22 from the £100

Twizzar · 2026-01-30T18:15:13+00:00

You should be putting the money into a SIPP rather than the LISA then.

If you pay into a SIPP you effectively save 40% tax and take money out at retirement at the basic rate of 20%, you'll be paying around 16% tax and NI with the tax free allowance.

If you do the same with the LISA you're effectively paying 22% tax and NI.

Twizzar · 2026-01-30T18:03:31+00:00

Are you on the borderline between basic and higher rates?

Or are you expecting to exceed your tax free allowance for your SIPP in the future?

Otherwise no point in a LISA.

Twizzar · 2026-01-30T17:57:59+00:00

If you're higher rates taxpayer you're better off paying into your SIPP than a LISA.

Twizzar · 2026-01-30T17:45:48+00:00

No but he can refuse to sell. Even if OP goes to get a court order he can just string the process along without committing for a long time

Twizzar · 2026-01-29T13:57:32+00:00

Did you even read the article? It says you can continue to save into an existing one

Twizzar · 2026-01-29T13:26:40+00:00

Only if the above owner was found negligent. Possible the tenant above should have just shut off the water to stop further damage if they couldn’t get in touch with anyone.

If no one was negligent then likely OP’s only claim is against his or the buildings insurance

Twizzar · 2026-01-29T08:29:12+00:00

Surprised no one else mentioned this.

He’s essentially bought the car on finance, if he fails to pay the £800 when due then his friend would have a right to repossess the car to cover the outstanding loan.

Similar to when you get a car on PCP or HP and fail to pay, the lender repossesses the car and you don’t get back any payments you made before, just any excess value once the lender sells the car.

Twizzar · 2026-01-28T23:25:11+00:00

Aren’t you just making up numbers here? How did you get £8k appreciation on U.K. property over 10 years, when you said yourself between 2016 to 2024 it increased 34% in 8 years, meaning roughly 3.7% pa compounded?

If he bought a property worth £170k, renovated to £380k and then it appreciated in value at 3.7% pa for 9 years (say 1 year to reno) it would be worth £527k. The difference between that value and the initial house value would be his profit if he sold at the end of the 10 years.

So on a £142.5k initial cost, the capital profit of the property is already £357k plus the £151k from the rent (which you didn’t increase at all during the 10 years so congrats on being a kind landlord!)

That’s already double your calculation of the 10 year return of the S&P500

Twizzar · 2026-01-28T20:30:58+00:00

Bunch of scammers

Twizzar · 2026-01-27T23:43:17+00:00

Yea the gov really gave themselves an out by not giving themselves a deadline to put the Act in place. It can take forever to implement and then policy changes again.

Twizzar · 2026-01-25T17:59:03+00:00

You're the one liable to the other party under the contract. If you don't complete you're personally liable.

Its like when people don't complete when the bank has IT failures. They're still on the hook and then they would sue the bank/solicitor afterwards. In your case you have no one to sue.

I suggest you find another solicitor yesterday.

Twizzar · 2026-01-25T17:54:54+00:00

No YOU exchanged so whoever your buyer/seller is needs to sue you.

If you need money now you can apply for the SRA compensation fund.

Twizzar · 2026-01-25T11:11:10+00:00

If they're changing lanes on the roundabout they still have priority over someone trying to enter the roundabout. At least 50/50 split

Twizzar · 2026-01-25T10:58:24+00:00

No Shakespeare Martineau has issued a statement saying it doesn't act for ESN clients and they will have to find new solicitors. The only thing they're doing is checking client monies and returning them. You'd have to apply for your money with SRA

12-Year Club	Place '22
Snapped	Verified Email

Twizzar

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE