Due diligence and reporting to lender

You may also find the Searches and enquiries—overview and Due diligence and reporting—overview topics useful for details of the usual and additional searches, checklists on various due diligence and title issues.

This overview gives an outline of the due diligence process undertaken by the lender and borrower's solicitors in a real estate finance transaction.

The property and its associated rental income stream are key to the lender's assessment of the risk and their security in the transaction. Accordingly, lenders will usually insist on full property due diligence being undertaken. From a lender's point of view, in most cases, they are concerned with assessing the rental income of the property or 'income return' over the loan period and 'capital return', namely how much the property will grow in value over the loan period. Anything arising in due diligence which would affect value, income or security will be material to the lender.

Note that while in residential conveyancing, the borrower's solicitor is often instructed to act for the bank as well on a mortgage of residential property. In commercial real estate loans, the risk of a conflict

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Property News

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at section 75A FA 2003 applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Property by content type :

Popular documents