Reconsider if HMO conversion is core to strategy. Indemnity policy unlikely to cover.
Title TGL14872, entry C-04
Bid with conditions. Two critical findings should hard-cap your ceiling.
The pack is broadly clean on title and searches but contains two material issues that should hard-cap your bidding ceiling: a restrictive covenant against commercial use, and a 5% retention of sale proceeds by the vendor for 12 months. Standard auction contract incorporated without unusual modifications.
For a buy-to-let strategy with a 5-year hold, the property is bid-able. We do not recommend HMO conversion given the covenant. Recommended ceiling reflects a conservative reading of the retention clause and the absence of a drainage search.
Every clause in the legal pack, ranked. Each finding is paired with a recommended action and a citation back to the source document.
Reconsider if HMO conversion is core to strategy. Indemnity policy unlikely to cover.
Title TGL14872, entry C-04
Build into bid price ceiling. Reduces effective bid headroom by ~£29k.
Special Conditions §11(b)
Order pre-completion (~£75) or accept the risk. Property age suggests mains connection.
Searches index, missing
Below-market cap. Negotiate up or accept limited recourse.
Special Conditions §14(c)
Pre-completion building reg search; potential remedial works.
Replies to enquiries §12
Fixed escalation at RPI+1%. Below market but rising.
Lease cl. 4(2)
No action.
Title TGL14872, A & B
No action.
LLC1, CON29
No action.
Envirosearch p.4
No action.
Contract front-sheet
No action.
Plan v. RICS measure
No action.
Vendor confirmation
No action.
CON29 §3.6
No action.
Title TGL14872
Findings with a measurable cost or contractual exposure, ranked by severity.
Documents, certificates and replies that are absent, incomplete or non-committal — and how each gap affects your position.
Cannot confirm mains drainage. Lender may decline; refurb costs uncertain if private system.
Vendor declines to confirm whether the loft conversion has Building Regulations sign-off.
Cannot assess service charge history or sinking fund position. Affects yield and exit.
Extension built 2019 — no certificate of lawfulness on file. Risk of enforcement window still open.
Required for any tenanted use. Not in pack — cost to remediate is unknown.
EPC referenced in particulars but copy not attached. Confirmed valid until 2031 on register.
Covenant references a 1962 plan — not appended. Boundary of restriction unclear.
Targeted enquiries to put to the seller’s solicitor before exchange. Each is tied to a specific finding or gap in the pack — answers materially affect bid price or whether to proceed.
Please confirm whether the loft conversion has Building Regulations completion certificates and provide copies.
Why ask: Replies §12 currently states "not known". Affects warranty, lender appetite and resale.
Please supply a copy of the 1962 filed plan referenced in entry C-04 of the title.
Why ask: Restrictive covenant boundary cannot be assessed without it.
Confirm whether any indemnity policies are in place in respect of the title defects identified.
Why ask: No policy schedule attached; exposure transfers on completion.
Please clarify the calculation basis for the 5% vendor retention under §11(b) — including release triggers, longstop date and arbitration.
Why ask: £29,250 of capital tied up for up to 12 months.
Confirm whether the vendor liability cap in §14(c) survives completion or applies only to pre-exchange representations.
Why ask: Materially changes recoverable damages on title issues.
Will a CON29DW (drainage & water) search be ordered before completion at the vendor’s cost?
Why ask: Standard searches incomplete; lender condition.
Please supply the most recent EICR and gas safety certificate.
Why ask: Required for any tenanted use; remediation cost unquantified without report.
Please supply service charge accounts and budget for the last three years, plus current sinking fund balance.
Why ask: Yield and exit modelling depends on charge trajectory.
Confirm whether the head lease contains any forfeiture, restriction on assignment or alienation clauses materially affecting exit.
Why ask: Affects sub-letting strategy and disposal options.
Please confirm the rear extension constructed in 2019 has either a Lawful Development Certificate or planning permission, and supply a copy.
Why ask: Without LDC, enforcement window may still be open.
Confirm there are no pending or threatened planning enforcement notices, and supply a copy of any planning correspondence with the local authority in the last 5 years.
Why ask: Material adverse fact for lender and resale.
Bidq prepares the enquiries pack ready for your solicitor or buying agent to issue. Responses received before bid should be re-attached to the report for a supplementary review.
Every document supplied in the pack, indexed and reviewed against the Bidq diligence framework.
The pack is broadly clean on title and searches. Two material issues — a restrictive covenant against commercial use, and a 5% vendor retention — should hard-cap your bidding ceiling. Four further conditional items can be priced in or addressed via pre-bid enquiries.
Proceed if your strategy tolerates a 12-month retention and a covenanted residential use. Decline if HMO conversion is core to the thesis.
Six actions, ranked. Work through these before the lot opens.
Same framework, same solicitor team. Fixed fee. Delivered in time to bid.