Renting Property From A Dissolved Company

[philkool]

Can a dissolved company have properties rented out through a letting agent

[Buenchico]

A dissolved company can't own anything. (At the moment that it is dissolved all of its assets (if any) pass directly to the Crown).

So it clearly can't rent out what it doesn't own.

[philkool]

Thanks Buenchico.
I pay the rent to a management company but on my tenancy agreement the owners of the property are a dissolved company, so does this have any bearing on the fact they have sent a section 21 stating they wish to sell the property ?

[EDDIE51]

They have sent the s21 because they are dissolved and must sell all their assets including the property you are renting from them.

[philkool]

This company Sovereign Property Holdings Ltd was dissolved in 2010 ,
Thats why im asking if it's legal or can they carry on letting property.

[Buenchico]

'They' simply don't exist!

Whoever owns the property, it definitely isn't Sovereign Property Holdings Ltd, so I can't see how any notice issued in that company's name can be valid.

Start by forking out £3 to download a copy of the title register for the property from here:
https://www.gov.uk/search-property-information-land-registry
Then, at least, you'll know who your landlord actually is!

[Peter Pedant]

// So it clearly can't rent out what it doesn't own.//

this is not really a correct statement of the law ( he means ;let' by the way)

You rent from a landlord and questioning title which you are here
surprise surprise we have had a few weeks ago

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Law/Question1524765.html

clearly this implies that you could have a enforceable rental agreement with someone who doesnt own it ( the real owner has better title anyway)

however I think that it the fella winding up the company that is the one who is serving the s21 on you and I think it is valid
valid in the sense that if he applies to a court to throw you out they will do so

[Buenchico]

PP: The company isn't being wound up. It's gone beyond that. The company was dissolved (which can only happen AFTER all of the 'winding up' processes have been completed) over six years ago. (24/08/10)

As part of the 'winding up' procedure, the company's assets (including Philkool's home) will have been sold to someone. Neither Sovereign Property Holdings Ltd (which no longer exists) nor the administrator/liquidator for that company (whose duties were discharged upon the company being dissolved) can have any control over Philkool's home.

My own guess is that whoever bought the property decided to continue using the same letting agent that Sovereign Property Holdings engaged. That agent hasn't fully updated their files and, when the new owner asked for a S21 notice to be issued, sent out the paperwork with the wrong landlord's name shown. Since a notice sent out in the name of a non-existent landlord has no more effect than one sent out in the name of Mickey Mouse., it simply can't be valid.

(Admittedly, all that the letting agent -or the actual landlord - has to do is to send out a new notice, with the landlord's name correctly shown but, until that time, Philkool is not yet in receipt of a valid S21 notice).

[Peter Pedant]

well we gonna have to differ

philkool had better turn up to any hearing or else the non existent plaintiff will get possession by default

[philkool]

I now have a copy of the land registry, and the owners are Mr and Mrs *****
of the same address as i rent , and have owned it since 1993, also they have been directors of several companies name Sovereign .
I started renting the property in Feb 1992.
I will be going to any court hearing as i have nothing to lose.
thanks for your replies.

[Buenchico]

If it's a married couple who own the property then any paperwork should be in their names. (They can't get the legal protection which is given to limited companies simply by using the name of a company that they happen to be directors of. To do that they'd need to actually transfer ownership of the property to such a company, which they most definitely can't do if the company no longer exists!)

[Peter Pedant]

Look you cant have a married couple owning the property
and a dissolved company "owning" it at the same time

On the facts stated
it is likely the judge would find that there is a lease
and that it has been lawfully terminated by the s21
and that at a hearing he will sign the order for possession

I havent seen the documents

It may be worth - wait for it ! - taking them down to your local citizens Advice and getting them to eyeball them and answer your questions
( to wit the name on the s21 is of a now non existent company whose directors have the freehold)

I think the point you are making ( the plaintiff who is seeking eviction doesnt own the property as a company but oops does as a person... ergo ) is a dog that just will not get up and run

this is just someone's (me actually) opinion on the internet

BC has other ideas and is telling you to spend money on it