The purchasers would ONLY have a recognizable interest if they had bought it, one, believing that there was NO CHARGE on the property, two, they carried out due diligence to the extent that a rational purchaser would have believed the property to be uncharged.
On the second point, hapo ndo wanaingililia…
Bought what? Not clear. I want to imagine that when applying for the development loan, the developer must have indicated where the cash-flow will come from. Most likely from the sale of the units. Therefore the chargee must have acknowledged the buyers’ interest. What would normally happen is that the bank will do partial discharges as the property buyers complete their payments.
Bought houses, not pigs.
The bank is smart.
They dont wanna get into your business with the buyers; they protect themselves. They start and stop their legal recognition at the contractual parties at the time of the loan issuance. The buyers, since they were indeterminable at that stage, are strangers to the bank, say contract.
Hell, nobody even knows if you gonna get buyers for the units financed at the loan-issuance stage…
If someone sells you a car that has a loan with the log book charged to a bank, and the seller defaults on loan payments, then expect the bank to send auctioneers to repossess your car. Same with these home owners. They bought houses that were charged to the bank and the bank has a right to liquidate the security (houses and land) to settle the loan.
Bank told them to pay again, buyers are saying they can’t pay again for something they already own.
Buyers can sue the developers by breach of contract only
Kabisaaa Bank followed the law to the last word. So the same law as to protect them to the last instance, buyers bought without following the due process, they can’t claim now the law needs to protect them.
He who comes to court, let him come with clean hands.