Lawyer input please?

[Ad Oculos]

I will be phoning my lawyer on Monday and the Police will be contacted about the perp but meanwhile here it is.

I herited a property on a 50/50 basis which it was agreed between the two beneficiaries to be sold. One Executor perp has been up to no good thieving from the Estate but at the last contact they were to register it for sale on the openl market. I halave just discovered online that it has been sold by the perp without my consultation and he's pocketed 175,000. It found out from the Scottish registry that 2 people bought it and I have their names.

Legally, am I right that unbeknown to them the perp must have fraudulently represented themselves as the sole owner so legally they DON'T own it? Or for all I know at the moment they were in on the fraud.l but that's unlikelym

The paperwork states that they got their mortgage from Barclays. Wouldn't Barclays have a duty to make sure they saw the Deeds and that it was in one name only? (The Deeds of course, do NOT show that,) the same would apply to the buyers unless sormehow they were shown fake Deeds.

Surely the couple can sue the perp and report them to the Police. And where do I go from here? Are the new owners legally speaking, now squatting in this property which is 50% owned by me? How do I get them out?

[Ad Oculos]

Sorry about the typos. Btw, this took place under Scottish Law.

[sederunt]

I will be phoning my lawyer on Monday and the Police will be contacted about the perp but meanwhile here it is.

I herited a property on a 50/50 basis which it was agreed between the two beneficiaries to be sold. One Executor perp has been up to no good thieving from the Estate but at the last contact they were to register it for sale on the openl market. I halave just discovered online that it has been sold by the perp without my consultation and he's pocketed 175,000. It found out from the Scottish registry that 2 people bought it and I have their names.

Legally, am I right that unbeknown to them the perp must have fraudulently represented themselves as the sole owner so legally they DON'T own it? Or for all I know at the moment they were in on the fraud.l but that's unlikelym

The paperwork states that they got their mortgage from Barclays. Wouldn't Barclays have a duty to make sure they saw the Deeds and that it was in one name only? (The Deeds of course, do NOT show that,) the same would apply to the buyers unless sormehow they were shown fake Deeds.

Surely the couple can sue the perp and report them to the Police. And where do I go from here? Are the new owners legally speaking, now squatting in this property which is 50% owned by me? How do I get them out?

An inherited house which is to be sold is unlikely to be put into the names of the beneficiaries so can be sold by the executor(s).

[Ad Oculos]

Oh dear. I thought I might get some ACTUAL lawyer help on here, not gibberish. The house is 1. Named in the will and 2. Had already been registered as having new owners by the solicitor who dispersed the Estate and wound it up.

[sederunt]

Something not quite right about your situation. If the land register was updated, then the house could not be sold by one joint owner.

The reason why the land register would be updated with beneficiaries as owners, for an inherited house that was to be sold, is not obvious.

[PallasAthena]

(Deleted - spam post now removed)

[Pezza54]

You should contact the solicitor that sold the property. The sale sounds above board, you agreed to the property being sold with the other joint owner.
(joint owners in Scotland, tenants in common in England)
As joint owner with a 50% interest you are entitled to half the proceeds of the sale after fees are deducted.
Hence my first sentence. The solicitor should have ensured you received your entitlement. Hopefully the solicitor is still holding onto your money, waiting for you to make contact