An investor had bought a tenanted house in Preston at auction, with a 25-year lease and a live rent dispute on the title. One lender had already declined at application stage once its solicitors read the lease. Aura Capital put the full legal position to a specialist lender on day one, secured written terms 42 minutes after the enquiry, and the purchase completed on the auction deadline.
The Situation
The client had bought a freehold end-terrace house in Preston at auction in August 2026 for £87,500, in her own name, as an investment. Like every auction purchase, it came with a fixed completion date. Miss it, and the deposit is lost.
The property was subject to a 25-year social housing lease. The leaseholder was in significant arrears and a rent dispute was live. The seller had indicated the lease would be surrendered before completion, but an auction contract doesn't depend on an indication. If the surrender didn't happen, the client still had to complete, with the lease, the tenant and the dispute all in place.
One specialist lender had already given indicative terms, then declined at application stage once its legal review reached the lease. A second application was running elsewhere with another broker, but it wasn't moving, and the deadline was getting closer.
The requirement was simple to state and hard to meet: a lender that would fund the property exactly as it stood, encumbered and tenanted, and confirm that in writing before the client paid any more non-refundable fees.
The Complexity
The first lender had declined late because the lease only surfaced during its legal review. That's the expensive way to find out. So rather than submitting a standard application and hoping the lease would be accepted, we led with it.
We selected a specialist lender that underwrites complex titles in-house, and sent the full picture in the enquiry: the lease, the arrears, the dispute and the auction deadline. The lender asked two questions. What was the dispute actually about? And what was the leaseholder paying against what the lease required? We had both answers back within five minutes.
The dispute was about arrears, not the validity of the lease or the title. Arrears affect rental income, and the exit didn't rely on rental income in the short term. It relied on a refinance once the lease position was resolved.
Written terms in 42 minutes. The enquiry went in at 10:24. At 11:06 the same morning the client had written terms that accepted the lease position explicitly, with no lease-surrender or vacant-possession condition, before she had committed to any further non-refundable cost.
How the Deal Was Structured
The facility was structured at £65,250, 75% LTV against a value of £87,000, at 1.25% per calendar month, with nine months' interest retained so there were no monthly payments. The net advance was £52,476.
The legal question went to the right place. The lender didn't require the dispute to be resolved. Its solicitors confirmed from the legal pack that the lender's position was protected, and that no liability from the dispute, any side letter or the management arrangements could pass to it. That was the same point on which the first lender had withdrawn.
The client initially stayed with the second application she already had running. When it hadn't progressed with about a week to go, she came back. The day-one terms were unchanged, so there was nothing to renegotiate.
Two things then protected the timetable. A desktop valuation meant no physical inspection to book. And dual representation meant one firm of solicitors acted for both the client and the lender, covering the purchase and both sides of the loan, which removed a week of duplicated review of the same auction pack. The loan completed on the auction deadline of 22 September 2026.
The rate was above what a straightforward case attracts. The case carried an encumbered title, a live dispute, an auction clock and a legal review that had already stopped one lender, and it was priced for that. What mattered to the client was that the rate, fees and deductions were set out in writing on day one and didn't move.
The Numbers
| Borrower | Individual property investor |
| Property | Freehold end-terrace house, tenanted |
| Location | Preston, Lancashire |
| Transaction | Auction purchase, no vacant possession |
| Property value | £87,000 |
| Gross facility | £65,250 |
| LTV | 75% |
| Rate | 1.25% per calendar month |
| Term | 9 months |
| Interest | Retained, no monthly payments |
| Net advance | £52,476 |
| Charge | First charge |
| Valuation | Desktop valuation |
| Legal | Dual representation |
| Enquiry to terms | 42 minutes |
| Completion | On the auction deadline |
| Exit strategy | Refinance once the lease position is resolved |
| Product | Unregulated auction bridging finance |
The Outcome
Written terms 42 minutes after enquiry
Funded with the tenant and lease in place
No lease-surrender condition
No physical valuation required
One firm of solicitors for both sides
No monthly payments
Terms unchanged from day one
Completed on the auction deadline
Why This Case Worked
The client's real risk wasn't the rate. It was a lender saying yes and then withdrawing after the fees had been spent. The way to remove that risk was to put the hardest part of the case in front of the lender first, not last.
Choosing the right lender mattered as much as presenting the case well. A lender that underwrites titles in-house and relies on its solicitors' reading of the pack could give a firm answer quickly. A lender that treats an encumbered title as a reason to decline would only have reached the same answer as the first lender, just later.
Speed then came from removing duplication: written terms on day one, a desktop valuation, and one firm of solicitors for both sides. Together, they turned a purchase other lenders wouldn't fund into a completion on the deadline.
Products Used in This Case
This transaction was structured using Aura Capital's auction bridging finance capability, funding a tenanted purchase without vacant possession on a fixed auction deadline.
The facility used a desktop valuation rather than a physical inspection, and was arranged as unregulated bridging finance on an investment property.
Auction Deadline and an Awkward Title?
Leases, tenants, disputes or a lender that has already pulled out. Send us the legal pack and we'll put it in front of a lender that's comfortable with it, with an answer in writing before you spend anything further.
Get a QuoteThis case study has been anonymised to protect client confidentiality. Outcomes vary depending on individual circumstances and lender criteria. This does not constitute financial or legal advice.
