Duty of care.

Dear Sirs,

I bought two ajoining properties a few years ago, with an 800 Sq. meters plot of land to the rear of the garden.
I used a local Abogado to do the conveyancing, and to do an agrupacion of the property, so we could make the two houses into one residence, and everything has been O.K.

My wife and I (My wife is Spanish) agree that the land to the rear is mentioned in the escritura, however the ownership of the land to the rear has recently come into question.

My abogado tells me he doesn't think the land belongs to us. My wife and I dissagree, and told him so. I also said that I wasn't very impressed by his doubts over ownership of the land, as he was the one who had done the conveyancing when we bought the property.

He tells me this isn't his resposability, as he never looked at the property.

Surely he owes me Duty of care?
Isn't the fact that he never viewed the property, to make sure we were buying what was on the escritura, negligent?

The manager of the bank lending us the money to buy the property, went himself to see the property, and was quite happy to lend us the money.

I am beginning to have doubts about this lawyer, as he has asked me for money in advance, to pay a procurater, and a small advance for himself, and another lawyer, who are presenting another matter for me to the local courts.
He also asked us to pay him cash when he did the conveyancing.

Thanking you in anticipation of your thoughts on this matter.

Dear Sir,

A lawyer would normally never go to see the property itself. The lender's surveyor would.

What a lawyer does is that he checks the vendor/s own/s both plots of land, that they are duly registered and the description matches (size, boundaries..), there are no charges, liens and encumbrances against them amongst other issues.

Your lawyer should have verified that both plots of land were able to be conveyed. Another different matter is the "agrupación" which he must request.

You don't detail on why do you think there's a problem with the second plot of land.

Yours faithfully,

Dear Sir,

thank you for your reply.

The plot of land, is actually part of the same parcella. The two properties I bought, have two ajoining properties at the front. My property is to the rear, with the plot of land to the rear of that (My garden)
The two houses at the front are A & B, and my property was C & D. Now we have done the acrupation, we are C.
A,B, & C, is, I am told, a comunity, as we share the same parcella.
I have a dispute over a seperate matter with my neigbours in A.
Due to the dispute, they have brought up the matter over the plot at the back of my garden.
My lawyer seems to think they have a point.
Each house has its own private garden, walled off from the neigbours, and I think the point they make, is the land is comunal. They say they have a right to access the plot through my property. But then, so is their garden, so technically I believe, I could sit by their pool!

My lawyer says he can't see reference to the plot on the escritura. But it's obvious to me, my wife, and the bank. All the areas match up with the town hall plans, and measurments I have had made indipendently at the property, match with the town hall plans.

I guess really all I wanted to know is if my lawyer was just in throwing a potential problem back at my feet.

He refuses to answer my e-mails requesting a meeting at the property, at his convenience, to see the property fisthand, as the bank did, and my phone calls get his assistant telling me he's busy and will call me later. I'm still waiting, and I feel cheated.

I'm quite confident their isn't a problem with the plot, and the neigbours are just trying to scare me away from another issue.
I'm just unhappy about the attitude of my lawyer. He hasn't inspired confidence.

Thank you for putting me right on his duties.

Kindest regards,
mikeh.

You're welcome.

Regards,