Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situation?

[cul8rm8e]

The situation is that a security was taken over a development plot of land by a lender. The lender was to provide funding in two stages. First stage released (approx 30% of contracted amount).

Only a few weeks later after releasing the first stage of funds,and only a few weeks into the short term contract between the lender and the borrower, the lender decides to sell on the security to a third party for the full amount that they were supposed to lend the borrower under the contract for which the security taken against, effectively the lender is now in profit by Łtens of thousands.

The lender refuses to give the borrower the rest of money under the original contract.(a long story but the lender simply wanted to alter the terms of the original contract which would cost the borrower many Łthousands, the borrower refuses and all breaks down) The lenders solicitor threatens that they will take legal action to repossess for the 30% of funds they did provide + fees, even though her client, "the lender" had no interest in the plot of land at the time as he sold on the security to a stranger.

Now, Another solicitor within the same firm ( only one office for this solicitors and i think 4 solicitors working under a partnership company, Not Limited) carried out both the selling and buying of the security to the third party stranger who happens to live outside the UK, this was done without the knowledge of the borrower who owned the land and who had given security to the lender for an amount he never supplied.

Effectively during period of negotiations to resolve the issue with the lender trying to get them to release the second stage funds under the contract, the solicitor acting on his behalf knew fine well that her client didnt hold any interest in the land as her company had acted on behalf of the lender(her client) who sold it to another third party and while still adding all her legal fees to her bill against the borrower under the original contract because the borrower would not agree to a change in the contract terms the lender wanted to include at a later time after everything was signed and concluded.

If anyone here can decipher this, as it has took a while for me to try and understand what has gone on here, I would very much appreciate your comments.

Is it even possible for this to be legal?

[IanM]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

The situation is that a security was taken over a development plot of land by a lender. The lender was to provide funding in two stages. First stage released (approx 30% of contracted amount).

Only a few weeks later after releasing the first stage of funds,and only a few weeks into the short term contract between the lender and the borrower, the lender decides to sell on the security to a third party for the full amount that they were supposed to lend the borrower under the contract for which the security taken against, effectively the lender is now in profit by Łtens of thousands.

The lender refuses to give the borrower the rest of money under the original contract.(a long story but the lender simply wanted to alter the terms of the original contract which would cost the borrower many Łthousands, the borrower refuses and all breaks down) The lenders solicitor threatens that they will take legal action to repossess for the 30% of funds they did provide + fees, even though her client, "the lender" had no interest in the plot of land at the time as he sold on the security to a stranger.

Now, Another solicitor within the same firm ( only one office for this solicitors and i think 4 solicitors working under a partnership company, Not Limited) carried out both the selling and buying of the security to the third party stranger who happens to live outside the UK, this was done without the knowledge of the borrower who owned the land and who had given security to the lender for an amount he never supplied.

Effectively during period of negotiations to resolve the issue with the lender trying to get them to release the second stage funds under the contract, the solicitor acting on his behalf knew fine well that her client didnt hold any interest in the land as her company had acted on behalf of the lender(her client) who sold it to another third party and while still adding all her legal fees to her bill against the borrower under the original contract because the borrower would not agree to a change in the contract terms the lender wanted to include at a later time after everything was signed and concluded.

If anyone here can decipher this, as it has took a while for me to try and understand what has gone on here, I would very much appreciate your comments.

Is it even possible for this to be legal?

Blatant Fraud!

The original lender only had security over the 30% and the solicitor knew this full well as is proved in the threat of legal action to repossess for the original 30%, I hope you have the letter to confirm this threat of legal action as it proves the solicitor was aware that there was only 30% funding secured.

Even if the original lender did sell the security under the terms of the contract they would only be allowed to receive the 30% they originally lent you. The buyer of the contract would then have to honour the contract and the rest of the funds for the project should have been made available to you by the solicitor acting for the new owner of the contract.

The solicitors are definitely the ones at fault as they should have only paid the original lender the 30% and retained the rest of the funds for you to finish the project in accordance with the terms of the original contract.

Write to the firm of solicitors and obtain all your paperwork.

Find a solicitor that handles professional negligence.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

thanks

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

Blatant Fraud!

The original lender only had security over the 30% and the solicitor knew this full well as is proved in the threat of legal action to repossess for the original 30%, I hope you have the letter to confirm this threat of legal action as it proves the solicitor was aware that there was only 30% funding secured.

Even if the original lender did sell the security under the terms of the contract they would only be allowed to receive the 30% they originally lent you. The buyer of the contract would then have to honour the contract and the rest of the funds for the project should have been made available to you by the solicitor acting for the new owner of the contract.

The solicitors are definitely the ones at fault as they should have only paid the original lender the 30% and retained the rest of the funds for you to finish the project in accordance with the terms of the original contract.

Write to the firm of solicitors and obtain all your paperwork.

Find a solicitor that handles professional negligence.

Do you think i should send to the lenders solicitor a Subject Access Request for this information, and would they have to include this information, baring in mind that they acted on behalf of their client (the/my lender). My first thought is that they would have to provide this information as it has my name and address within the documents relating to the dealing with the lender selling on the charge/security to the third party.

It is also my understanding that should they be obliged to provide this information and dont, that in itself is a breach.

I have already previously sent a SAR to the lender a couple of months after the date which i now know was the time they sold the charge/security but they never provided anything to indicated they had sold it on.

[IanM]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

Do you think i should send to the lenders solicitor a Subject Access Request for this information, and would they have to include this information, baring in mind that they acted on behalf of their client (the/my lender). My first thought is that they would have to provide this information as it has my name and address within the documents relating to the dealing with the lender selling on the charge/security to the third party.

It is also my understanding that should they be obliged to provide this information and dont, that in itself is a breach.

I have already previously sent a SAR to the lender a couple of months after the date which i now know was the time they sold the charge/security but they never provided anything to indicated they had sold it on.

I doubt if you would be able to SAR the lenders solicitor as they are working for the lender and not yourself so are not obliged to provide you with anything concerning their actions on behalf of their 'other' client.

You can send a SAR to the original lender direct and they have to provide you with any information you ask for, if they refuse to send you the information you can contact the ICO for advice.

You can also request your own files from your solicitor which should contain enough information for you to begin a claim against them.

You could also check with the land registry to see if the new lender has secured the title of the land in respect of their purchase of your loan contract.

Your best bet would be to find a solicitor that specialises in professional negligence and explain the situation to them as you have done in your original post here and they should be able to help you.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

The original lender did receive a SAR from me but they provided no such information relating to what they have done. I expected that as the lender has made it clear he thinks he is above all law and regulations.

the new lender wasnt a lender as such, he was just an individual from outside UK and yes the individual did have the charge registered at land registry. there is a clear trail of everything that was done.

This is one case that wont go away until he and at least a couple of others face up to their actions.

[IanM]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

The original lender did receive a SAR from me but they provided no such information relating to what they have done. I expected that as the lender has made it clear he thinks he is above all law and regulations.

the new lender wasnt a lender as such, he was just an individual from outside UK and yes the individual did have the charge registered at land registry. there is a clear trail of everything that was done.

This is one case that wont go away until he and at least a couple of others face up to their actions.

If you need help finding a solicitor to help you, PM me and I will give you the contact details of a very good professional negligence solicitor.

[cul8rm8e]

Re: Can the same solicitor act for both seller and buyer in this very strange situati

Thanks to everyone for their help and advice. The process has started to right the wrong done and i`m certain all will work out in the end with this.

thank you