Gifts Donors and Anti Money Laundering

The rise in gifted deposits has without doubt created further work for conveyancers.  Not only is there a need to check the nature of the contribution and to take steps to ensure a lender is aware of the gift, a conveyancer is also  obliged to consider exposure to liability under the anti money laundering legalisation.    

On the face of it the donor of the gift is not a client, there is no retainer. This raises the question of whether the legislation can be said to impose an obligation.  Interesting the Legal Sector Affinity Group Anti-Money Laundering Guidance for the Legal Sector ( March 2018) contains no reference whatsoever to the donation of gifts and of any requirements in relation to the donation of funds towards the purchase of a property. 

The customer due diligence (‘CDD’) obligation clearly only relates to a person who retains a conveyancer to undertake a service which is regulated under the The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 ( ‘Regulations’).  Strictly speaking a donor is not a client, and would not on the face of it be covered by Regulation 27 of the Regulations, that requires CDD to be applied when establishing a business relationship. Logically this must be correct,  The Donor has no direct relationship with the conveyancer, there is no retainer to provide a service, and the only connection is the existence of a relationship between the client and the donor.  

In fact, there is a duty on the conveyancer to advise the donor to seek independent legal advice before gifting the funds.  Clearly, if independent advice is sought the legal advisor would need to carry out CDD on the donor before providing that advice.  The same would apply if the contributor was looking to acquire a beneficial interest in the property to be purchased and sought separate legal advice for that purpose. 

So the starting point is there is no obligation on a conveyancer to undertake CDD on a donor unless with reference to Regulation 27 there is a suspicion of money laundering or terrorism funding.   

It could also be argued that if the donor is to send the funds directly into the conveyancer’s client account and the amount is £15,000 or over that this could be viewed as an ‘occasional transaction’, in which event there would be a need to undertake CDD on the donor. 

The more tricky question is whether there is a need to undertake a source of fund and wealth check on the donor where no suspicion of money laundering exists.  There is clearly an obligation to make checks on the funds to be used by a client to purchase a property as well as on the general wealth of the client.  But the question is does that obligation extend to checking where the donor has acquired the funds and  whether the amount of funds made available fits with the profile of the donor?  Again, the Guidance is not very helpful and has little if anything on what checks should be made. 

If a client says funds are coming from Granny then clearly there is a need for the client to produce evidence that is so, and to see a bank statements showing the money leaving Granny’s account and being credited to the clients account.  

If the funds are to be paid directly into the client account then there would be a need to make sure the source of those funds is checked and verified.   I mention that CDD would also need to be performed.    

The Guidance makes reference to ‘Know Your Client’ and of the need to capture information which will allow a conveyancer to create a profile of the client to assess the whether there is a fit between this and the nature and size of the transaction.  The difficulty with a donor is that as he or she is not your client it might be difficult without asking the right questions to carry out this assessment.  There are also data protection to consider and the related practical difficulties  in relation to privacy notices. 

There are some interesting academic questions surrounding the application of the Regulations  in relation to gift donations and the answer may be that conveyancers should be insisting that a donor instructs an independent advisor and requests that adviser to confirm that all CDD and AML checks have been undertaken.   

In the absence of that step, it seems the safest solution would be to always carry out CDD on donors as well as checks on the source of funds and wealth.  We treat a donor in the same way as the client and have  created a ‘pack’ which we send the donor to provide a privacy statement, to explain what is required, and to obtain the information we need to make sure that can carry out adequate checks on the donor’s funds and wealth.  

This may be viewed as excessive, but with the presence of some serious  crime sanctions for non compliance it is far better in my mind to be over cautious. 

MJP Conveyancing are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877067 or via email at davidp@mjpconveyancing.com

Are conveyancers over charging on ‘mum and dad’ assisted property transactions?

Introduction

The principle behind the insurance is that it protects the mortgagee’s (i.e. bank lending the money) title in the property if the donor of a gift or informal family loan goes bankrupt and  the donor’s creditors make a claim to the money as part of the donor’s assets.

But is it necessary?  Do all conveyancers actually understand the applicable law?

Background

The conveyancer is under a duty to both client and the client’s lender to ensure they obtain “a good and marketable title to the property and free from prior mortgages or charges and from onerous encumbrances which title will be registered with absolute title” (Solicitors’ Regulation Authority Handbook).

If there is a gift from a family member ( or a discounted purchase price when purchasing from a family member) or an informal loan the donor on the face of it will acquire an interest in the property. Gifted deposit insurance provides protection if the donor becomes insolvent and creditors of the donor make a claim putting the property at risk as well as the lender’s security.

The Law

The law behinds this is S339 of the Insolvency Act 1986 provides that if a bankrupt has within the previous five years “entered into a transaction with any person at an undervalue,” then “the trustee of the bankrupt’s estate may apply to the court for an order” to restore  the gift to the donor for the benefit of the creditors.

However S342(2)(a) offers the lender with protection stating that if an order is made under S339  this will not …. prejudice any interest in property which was acquired from a person other than that individual and was acquired in good faith and for value, or prejudice any interest deriving from such an interest”. Essentially the bank is protected from a Section 339 order by S.342 as long as it acts honestly and doesn't knowingly aid dishonesty. Its title in the property is therefore protected and in no way placed at risk .

The only time a  lender may not avail itself of this protection if the lender knew both that there was a gift/transaction at an undervalue and that the donor was already insolvent or a petition of bankruptcy had been presented when the gift was made. Hence the need for the conveyancer to carry our ID and bankruptcy checks against the donor.

Interestingly if this situation was allowed to arise then gifted deposit insurance would not assist in any event.

If the gift was specially made to put it beyond the reach of creditors, an order could be made under  Sections 423–425 of the Insolvency Act to restore the position to that before the transaction at an undervalue. Section 425 however would protect the lender if its interest was “acquired in good faith, for value and without notice of the relevant circumstances”.  Again unless the lender was aware of what was going on the lender would not be affected by the insolvency.

Council for Mortgage Lenders Handbook

This states:

‘If you are aware that the title to the property is subject to a deed of gift or a transaction at an apparent undervalue completed within five years of the proposed mortgage then you must be satisfied that we will acquire our interest in good faith and will be protected under the provisions of the Insolvency (No 2) Act 1994 against our security being set aside. If you are unable to give an unqualified certificate of title, you must arrange indemnity insurance (see section 9)

‘You must effect an indemnity insurance policy whenever the Lenders’ Handbook identifies that this is an acceptable or required course to us to ensure that the property has a good and marketable title at completion’.

Practical Implications

Providing the checks on identification and bankruptcy come back all clear,  it would seem from this analysis that an unqualified certificate of title could be given to the lender where there is a gifted deposit.

Is there a need to obtain a letter of postponement from the donor, that is a ‘gift letter’.  Probably yes in terms of good practice though the Land Registration Act 2002 does provide that a mortgagee has priority over any claim that the donor may have for the return of the gift,

Conclusion

By blindly insisting on indemnity insurance which appears on the above analysis of the law to be wholly unnecessary it seems conveyancers are not acting in their clients best interests.   

At the time the Insolvency ( No2) Act 1994 ( which made amendments to S342 (2) (a)  was passing through the then House of Lords Lord Coleraine said:

“the saving in that section [of the Insolvency Act] for a third party purchaser for value and in good faith will no longer be negatived merely by the purchaser’s knowledge of an earlier transaction at an undervalue or preference … the effect of the clause should be to speed conveyancing and greatly reduce the need for insurance in the cases where problems arise” (Hansard 1994 vol 554 at para 348).

Clearly the insurance industry is also very much guilty in terms of selling and promoting an insurance which seems to offer no purpose other than as a comforter to conveyancers.

There should also be a call made on the Council for Mortgage Lenders to review and to amend the Handbook to make the requirements  for seeking indemnity insurance on a gifted deposit clear and more in line with the Insolvency legislation.

Source :   *Gifted deposits and indemnity insurance: a risk assessment, Nick Piška, Conv. 2015, 2, 133-147  (Subscription required)

 MJP Conveyancing are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877067 or via email at david@mjpconveyancing.com

Gifts and buying a home

More and more property transactions are being funded in part by gifts from parents and other members of the family.  The involvement of a gift has implications which your solicitor is obliged to address and which will normally involve additional work.  

In this article I examine the obligations on your solicitor when you are purchasing a property with a mortgage and where you are receiving a gift to assist in the purchase of your home. 

The CML handbook ( which governs your solicitors relationship with your lender )  requires your solicitor to enquire of you as to how you intend to fund the balance monies - that is to say the difference between the purchase price and the amount borrowed under the mortgage. If your solicitor becomes aware that the balance is coming from somewhere other than your own savings or the sale of an asset (such as another property), for example a loan, or gift or second charge, then this must be reported to your lender.  

Your solicitor  will require your consent to make the report to your lender, and in the event that consent is not given your solicitor must return the lender's instructions (the mortgage offer) and explain that he can no longer act for you as a conflict of interest has arisen.  

If it is a gift of money your solicitor will need to obtain from the donor of the gift a letter to confirm that the monies to be advanced are a gift ( and will not be repayable) and that the donor will not by making the gift be looking to acquire an interest in the property. 

In addition, when acting in the purchase of a property at undervalue, or the purchase of a property by way of gift, your solicitor is required to obtain a clear bankruptcy search against the donor of the gift or seller  ( where there is a sale at undervalue ) and also obtain indemnity insurance. The reason for this is that if the donor of the gift or seller should become bankrupt within 2 years of the making of the gift/selling the property, the Official Receiver has the power to recall the gift.  Your lender therefore requires insurance to cover this eventuality. 

MJP Conveyancing  are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877067 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk