AMC policy

[delilah]

Should the AMC repossess a block of land, what is their policy with regards a sitting tenant ? First refusal to buy ? Notice to quit ?

 

[Billboy1]

i would imagine it gets auctioned or pt

 

[Flatland guy]

Should the AMC repossess a block of land, what is their policy with regards a sitting tenant ? First refusal to buy ? Notice to quit ?

It all depends whether AMC know there is a tenant on it. Could have been farmed by mortgagor at the beginning so would deem vacant possession because in the small print I bet any change to vacant possession basis should be notified to mortgagee (AMC).
If everything is above board regarding landlord/tenant status I bet they would just instruct an agent on private treaty basis with full and final offers in a short time frame or could just go to auction. If let on FBT just state when tenancy could be ended and current income per annum. If AHA just sell tenanted with current income per annum. All AMC will want is a, quick sale to get their money back but will be advertised to achieve maximum potential.

 

[delilah]

It was farmed by the landowner at the time the mortgage was taken out. So an existing FBT would only protect the tenant if the AMC were informed that it was in place ?

 

[Flatland guy]

Yes

It was farmed by the landowner at the time the mortgage was taken out. So an existing FBT would only protect the tenant if the AMC were informed that it was in place ?

Yes is the logical answer but is very rare land actually gets defaulted on like houses. Banks/ any mortgagee effectively like control and that their investment is safe, if vacant possession is deemed at start any tenant could affect land value and presumably if someone is in trouble and going to default I presume in the past someone will have tried by saying it is now let out to so and so (potentially a different family member and in that scenario the bank always win) Normally AMC only lend upto 50% of security value E. g. One million loan means security of two million of assets( at value loan was took out). To actually get all the way to repossession is extreme! So depending upon how the loan is being repaid unless interest only and things have gone against mortgagor, the mortgagor would be loosing extremely bad in the example above.
IIRC if you buy a house to let it is a different mortgage than if you live in yourself and have heard if you do let out your own home for whatever reason have to inform mortgage company who then decide what action to take. However there are probably many examples when the mortgagor is not informing the mortgagee but if all payments are fine and capital continues to be paid and dwindle down, they are going under the radar and not a problem for mortgagee unless repayments cannot be met.

 

[Mixedupfarmer]

Surely if the tenant had an FBT which had been correctly registered at the land registry, and any stamp duty paid, this would take legal precedence, and the terms of the tenancy (and any break clauses) would have to honoured by the AMC? If they had not been notified about the tenancy, that would be between them and the borrower?

 

[Flatland guy]

Surely if the tenant had an FBT which had been correctly registered at the land registry, and any stamp duty paid, this would take legal precedence, and the terms of the tenancy (and any break clauses) would have to honoured by the AMC? If they had not been notified about the tenancy, that would be between them and the borrower?

It will be one for the lawyers but I will reiterate the tenant might find out he has no claim it depends upon the small print of the loan/ mortgage otherwise you would have everyone buying land/houses creating a tenancy then default the mortgage company and the tenant being ok just does not happen. ( I mean why bother having the hassle of paying a mortgage when you could purchase for a year then potentially let to a family member on low rate long term tenancy, and default on mortgage. It would be anarchy) . The only times it does happen on homes if they are a proper buy to let mortgage and the mortgagor defaults sometimes the tenants then have the opportunity to purchase but it is rare.

Reading between the lines it looks as if someone is potentially trying to pull a fast one over a mortgage company either due to higher interest rates or whatever other reason but I can assure you it will not be allowed otherwise agricultural land would have been full of the scams already and no bank/institution would ever lend on land.

If you have a mortgage or long term loan probably best to sit down and read the small print or have it gone over with a lawyer because if the mortgagee of the property does not know I strongly suspect the tenancy would become null and void.

 

[delilah]

Landlord has informed the tenant that the AMC are about to commence repossession proceedings.

Landlord is unable to transfer title; having been declared bankrupt he cannot sell/transfer any of his assets.

Tenant has a five year FBT in place. This isn't registered with the land registry. Tenant wasn't aware that was a requirement. Is it possible for the tenant to carry out that registration unilaterally ? Or does it require landlord involvement ?

Tenant wishes to buy the land, or failing that have security of tenure.

 

[Mixedupfarmer]

Landlord has informed the tenant that the AMC are about to commence repossession proceedings.

Landlord is unable to transfer title; having been declared bankrupt he cannot sell/transfer any of his assets.

Tenant has a five year FBT in place. This isn't registered with the land registry. Tenant wasn't aware that was a requirement. Is it possible for the tenant to carry out that registration unilaterally ? Or does it require landlord involvement ?

Tenant wishes to buy the land, or failing that have security of tenure.

Don't think the tenant will have a leg to stand on then. Be interesting to see what happens, if it is auctioned, or AMC have favoured outlets for tree planting/BNG etc.

 

[Flatland guy]

Landlord has informed the tenant that the AMC are about to commence repossession proceedings.

Landlord is unable to transfer title; having been declared bankrupt he cannot sell/transfer any of his assets.

Tenant has a five year FBT in place. This isn't registered with the land registry. Tenant wasn't aware that was a requirement. Is it possible for the tenant to carry out that registration unilaterally ? Or does it require landlord involvement ?

Tenant wishes to buy the land, or failing that have security of tenure.

Well by the sounds of it the tenant will get chance to purchase the property whether he/she is classed as a tenant or not.

FBT are only registered with land registry if over six years in length but the tenant has to pay Stamp duty to HMRC on the tenancy and must be done at start of tenancy.

 

[Formatted]

Tenant has a five year FBT in place. This isn't registered with the land registry. Tenant wasn't aware that was a requirement. Is it possible for the tenant to carry out that registration unilaterally ? Or does it require landlord involvement ?

The tenant needs to contact the Tenant Farmers Association https://tfa.org.uk/

Ignore the stuff about land registry - ultimately the land is not being sold with vacant possession, there might be a clause in the FBT that talks about bankruptcy/insolvency of either party.

 

[glasshouse]

Landlord has informed the tenant that the AMC are about to commence repossession proceedings.

Landlord is unable to transfer title; having been declared bankrupt he cannot sell/transfer any of his assets.

Tenant has a five year FBT in place. This isn't registered with the land registry. Tenant wasn't aware that was a requirement. Is it possible for the tenant to carry out that registration unilaterally ? Or does it require landlord involvement ?

Tenant wishes to buy the land, or failing that have security of tenure.

How many years left?
Swift call to liquidator needed

 

[Still Farming]

Should the AMC repossess a block of land, what is their policy with regards a sitting tenant ? First refusal to buy ? Notice to quit ?

Can they sublet to start with??

 

[Martyn]

Having recently purchased a land parcel with a FBT tenant I would think AMC would just market it with a tenant on it until such date as the FBT expires, it hasn’t altered the land value at all down here, just a sitting game for FBT to end.

 

[delilah]

How many years left?
Swift call to liquidator needed

Of the FBT ? It is 18 months into a 5 year FBT.

 

[delilah]

A portion of the land is in a CS agreement stipulating the land use. Does the AMC / future owner have the power to get that agreement binned ? Or would any future owner have to stick by the conditions ?

 

[Martyn]

A portion of the land is in a CS agreement stipulating the land use. Does the AMC / future owner have the power to get that agreement binned ? Or would any future owner have to stick by the conditions ?

We had a CS agreement come with ours, the particulars said you had to take it all on, but in actual fact when we came to move it with the RPA they said change of ownership so it was upto us if we wanted to continue the agreement, we haven’t . There were no implications for the tenants as they signed upto it in good faith.

 

[ISCO]

Surely if the tenant had an FBT which had been correctly registered at the land registry, and any stamp duty paid, this would take legal precedence, and the terms of the tenancy (and any break clauses) would have to honoured by the AMC? If they had not been notified about the tenancy, that would be between them and the borrower?

To register an FBT would need AMC consent as there will be a restriction preventing dispositions on the freehold title. So yes, if FBT registered correctly the terms will bind AMC.

 

[Flat 10]

A portion of the land is in a CS agreement stipulating the land use. Does the AMC / future owner have the power to get that agreement binned ? Or would any future owner have to stick by the conditions ?

Stick to it I think

 

[Flatland guy]

A portion of the land is in a CS agreement stipulating the land use. Does the AMC / future owner have the power to get that agreement binned ? Or would any future owner have to stick by the conditions ?

Wow, this is all sounding like a lawyers dream!!

AMC have security on the land. If it goes to Court that will be the first step in the papertrail/time line of events. An agreement is between the 'landlord' and AMC that I think we can establish the 'tenant' has not seen a copy of. I presume the landlord/mortgagor got in a financial situation a few years earlier and stopped farming, possibly sold machinery then decided to let out. At the moment we do not know if the mortgagor notified AMC or not about letting out the land. This is the major stumbling point.
If has notified AMC everything should be above board but if not afraid tenant has not got no tenure realistically.
What is different about this case is that in agricultural land if it is let on any tenancy there is usually no charge against the land from any bank etc.
The thing that is strange is why the landlord/mortgagor could not see the 'writing on the wall' and sell before it got this bad, it is almost like he/she knew they were going to loose everything so just let it happen, if it is a personal bankruptcy there will have been more happening behind the scenes and for longer than anyone knew anything was being defaulted on.
Now the 'tenant' is 18 months in a five year CS agreement. Was the landlord/mortgagor notified it was going to be entered in a CS agreement? I think that legally the landlord/mortgagor has to sign a form of understanding.
Due to the fact that a lot of land is not held as security by banks etc. and is never really actually repossessed, we may witness a unique set of circumstances. It is thought provoking on the legalities of CS, will the tenant be in breach of their agreement....
Also to note going forward what happens regarding BNG/various carbon/environmental schemes in the event of bankruptcy/liquidation because you could have some clever person purchase agricultural land get paid all money for BNG because that is a private agreement at outset bank that money then just disappear and leave a bank etc holding some devalued environmental land and I am certain a bank/financial institution will not allow that to happen! Although if a bank/financial institution has charges over property, they usually have more than that so they are never over exposed should the worst happen. An interesting turn of events which may have a precedent going forwards.