Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Charity Cut Price Sale.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:26 am

atticus wrote:Getting planning permission can cost quite a bit. I am not talking about bribes. I am talking about preparing detailed plans, surveys, consultants etc, as well as the local authority fees that can be in 5 figures. This is why landowners often enter into option agreements with deveopers; developers having the resources.


So they could have, but were entirely reasonable in not doing so.

Especially in the case of Charity B, having spent so much on a lawyer and found no legal basis to be holding the title, it would have been a clear folly to spend more and their objects were best served by getting shot of it quickly?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10093
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby atticus » Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:54 pm

That is a possibility.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19875
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby dls » Sat Apr 15, 2017 3:03 pm

the legal estate is (or was) held by the Official Custodian for Charities, I had understood this to be the normal practice.

The first bit was not vlear to me from what you said - I may have missed it.
It is not teh normal practice. The vast majority of charities hold their own assets.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12263
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:33 pm

dls wrote:
the legal estate is (or was) held by the Official Custodian for Charities, I had understood this to be the normal practice.

The first bit was not vlear to me from what you said - I may have missed it.
It is not teh normal practice. The vast majority of charities hold their own assets.

Then I apologise for the confusion: I had not set that out because I had understood that that was normal practice, and beyond that, I am somewhat confused myself.

So to recap:
The trust is (or was) tied to the property, for the purpose of "providing an institute for the women of the village". The quote is, from memory, the words of the deed.
The property was held in trust by the Village Women's Institute; the trustees of the village Women's Institute were therefore trustees of the property.

The Charity Commission took the view that once the Village WI stopped paying its subscription to the National WI, then it ceased to exist... or possibly that it ceased to be a charity, I am not entirely clear on that point. Either way, it (CC) refused to talk to the trustees of the hall or their solicitors.

Were they right to take that view? I think they were not, but even if they were, with the trust being tied to the property, even with the charity wound up, I think the trustees should still have been trustees of the hall.

Even if they were not, the trust remains in the terms of the original trust: for the purpose of "providing an institute for the women of the village". If CC was right to pass the hall to County WI, then they should still have held it in trust on those terms.
On this point CC have acknowledged that they made a mistake, however the review (as instigated by the ombudsman) is running somewhat behind events as they were going to "confirm the basis upon which the Hall is held by <CountyWI> and to advise about the legal restrictions that apply when land is held for a designated purpose."
This being some time after the hall had already been sold...
Which brings us back to the question of how can a charity sell a property for a fraction of its value?
If it has done so with the consent of the Charity Commission, then why has the review of the case not found any record of that consent?

More importantly, what can be done?
At this point, nobody has provided any legal basis for the transfer to CountyWI, despite the best efforts of their solicitor.
If it was legally transferred, then it was sold contrary to the trust it was held under, and the price it was sold for appears to reflect the dodgyness of the sale...
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10093
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby atticus » Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:43 am

Have you seen a valuation?
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19875
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:20 am

No, but the village had been advised that they would need to raise at least £40,000 when they had it registered as a community asset.
When it came on the market, they weren't even told: it was sold through an estate agent at the other end of the county without ever being advertised.
I'm guessing he specialises in selling dodgy titles...
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10093
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby atticus » Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:04 pm

As you say, you are guessing.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19875
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:54 pm

I am guessing on the nature of the estate agent, not on the prices.
That guess has no bearing on the legal discussion.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10093
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:52 pm

Hairyloon wrote:That guess has no bearing on the legal discussion.

On second thoughts, perhaps it does:
dls wrote:Pleae not that the duty is not to get the best possible price. It is to get the best price reasonable obtainable.

If the best efforts of their solicitor have failed to find any legal basis for them holding the property, then it seems likely that they would need specialist help in selling it and the price would be significantly reduced because of the potential risk of the title being overturned. They could not have advertised the sale anywhere the village might find out because that would have given them the opportunity to expose the dodgy title and scupper the sale.
On that basis, it could well have been the best price reasonably obtainable, provided that "reasonable" only considers the price and not any moral or ethical considerations.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10093
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby dls » Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:38 am

HL, most of what you have said in this seems to have been based on a rather grubby suspicion. You are calling all sorts of people dodgy without any apparent justification.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12263
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

PreviousNext

Return to Trusts/Equity/Charity

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron