Doncaster Council lodged rival claim on £630,000 building during VAT sale dispute
City of Doncaster Council intervened during a disputed sale of a £630,000 property by its subsidiary to a private buyer by lodging its own ‘intended purchase’ of the building.
Doncaster Business Innovation Centre (DBIC) is currently owned by a council-owned company called Arthur Street (Doncaster) Developments. The property was sold at auction in June 2024 for £630,000 but the sale process is yet to be completed following a dispute over whether VAT was included in the sale price.
The building is due to be purchased by a company called DBIC Trading.
A Land Registry search to protect the firm’s intended purchase was lodged in July 2024. But a separate search on the same property was lodged the following month by the council – only to be subsequently withdrawn after concerns were raised by DBIC Trading’s lawyers.
A witness statement from a former Labour cabinet member called Joe Blackham, obtained by The Yorkshire Post, said he was told in August 2024 that the sale would be proceeding in line with the buyer’s position that the price included VAT. He said he communicated this to the buyer on August 19 but “later that day I became aware that this position had been reversed”.
His statement said that around August 27, he was informed the council had lodged an OS1 priority search - typically submitted before a property purchase - on DBIC. OS1 forms include a standard warning that submitting misleading information which could cause loss may constitute a criminal offence.
The Yorkshire Post has obtained a copy of an ‘application enquiry’ lodged by the council on August 19, 2024 with the Land Registry with the application type described as ‘search of whole (with priority) in respect of an intended purchase’.
This newspaper has also obtained a letter from lawyers representing Arthur Street Developments. They wrote to lawyers for DBIC Trading on September 12, 2024 stating that Arthur Street was “taking necessary steps to withdraw the priority search against the property in favour of the CDC”.
The letter said: “Our client has not agreed to or transacted with the CDC or another entity or individual to dispose of the property by any means.”
It added: “We trust the above will be sufficient to alleviate your client’s immediate concerns and there will be no need for any injunctive proceedings to be issued here.”
A question about the DBIC issue was raised by Reform councillor Jason Charity in February but subsequently edited out of a published council recording on the basis that it had included the “inappropriate” naming of a council officer.
It can now be reported that Councillor Charity’s question was based on Mr Blackham’s witness statement and he asked: “What bona fide disposition was the OS1 lodged to protect on 19 August 2024, and importantly, who authorised it?”
Councillor Charity said today his question remains unanswered. He said “what should have been a routine commercial transaction” has become “a governance failure of the first order”.
DBIC Trading said it could not comment “as the matter remains subject to an ongoing legal process”. Doncaster Council refused to comment.