Current location - Quotes Website - Personality signature - How many people's names can be written on the real estate license at most?
How many people's names can be written on the real estate license at most?
In mortgage to buy a house, only one name can be written on the contract. Because mortgage purchase can only be handled in accordance with the principle of who borrows money and who signs it, the signature on the purchase contract, loan contract and real estate license is unified, because it avoids the loan risk of banks.

If two people want to own real estate, they can apply for a * * * title certificate, that is, the title certificate must still be the name of one person, and the attached * * * title certificate can legally indicate the ownership of the real estate. At the same time, both parties agree on their respective capital contributions or shares, which can be divided reasonably in case of property disputes.

However, if two people want to share this property, they can go to the housing administration department to apply for the property ownership certificate at the same time, and the names of several people can be written on this certificate at the same time. Its function is to prove that the property right of this house belongs to several people.

Extended data:

The name on the real estate license is not necessarily "owner"

After the death of his son, Mr. Zhang, his mother Ding asked that a house under the name of her daughter, Ms. Zhang, be inherited by Mr. Zhang. Why? Recently, Suzhou Intermediate People's Court concluded a dispute over the confirmation and inheritance of house ownership in the second instance. According to the principle of probable evidence, it is judged that the house involved is owned by Mr. Zhang and inherited by his mother Ding.

Ms Zhang and Mr Zhang are brothers and sisters. In March 2006, Ms. Zhang and Mr. Zhang signed a house transfer contract and a real estate sales contract, stipulating that Mr. Zhang would sell all her houses to Ms. Zhang at a transaction price of 240,000 yuan. On March 29th, Ms. Zhang obtained the house ownership certificate and applied for a loan of RMB 6,543,800+0.4 million from the bank on the grounds of buying a house on the same day.

After the loan was approved, Ms. Zhang immediately handed over RMB 6.5438+0.4 million to Mr. Zhang. Since then, the house has been occupied by Mr. Zhang, and the bank loan has also been returned by Mr. Zhang. At the end of 20 12, Mr. Zhang died without leaving any will. As the only legal heir in the first order, his mother Ding Mou requested that the house involved be inherited as Mr. Zhang's estate.

Ms. Zhang believes that according to the provisions of China's Property Law, the certificate of real estate ownership is the proof that the obligee enjoys the property right of the real estate, so she owns the house and cannot be used as Mr. Zhang's legacy. The two sides failed to negotiate and appealed to the court. The court of first instance held that the two parties were brother and sister, and although the procedures for the registration and change of house property rights were handled, Ms. Zhang did not pay the down payment and the house was not actually delivered.

Still living in Mr. Zhang's place, and the bank loan has been returned by Mr. Zhang, it can be concluded that the house sales contract is not the true intention of the parties, and the real purpose is to apply for a loan from the bank for Mr. Zhang. The owner of the house is Mr. Zhang, who is inherited by Ding, the only heir in the first order.

Ms. Zhang refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and appealed to Suzhou Intermediate People's Court. The court of second instance held that if the parties provided evidence to prove that the registration of real estate was indeed wrong, the ownership certificate of real estate could not be used as the only basis to prove the ownership of real estate.

In this case, the house sales contract is not the true intention of the parties. The house has been occupied by Mr. Zhang, the loan has been returned by Mr. Zhang, and the house ownership certificate is held by Mr. Zhang. Ms. Zhang failed to provide direct evidence to prove that she paid Mr. Zhang 654.38 million yuan for the house. Suzhou Intermediate People's Court recently made a final judgment based on the principle of highly probable evidence: rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

Case explanation:

The judge of second instance said that according to Article 17 of the Property Law, the certificate of ownership of immovable property is the proof that the obligee enjoys the property right of immovable property. In the vast majority of real estate property rights changes, once registration occurs, the registered obligee is presumed to be the legal obligee.

However, in real life, the situation that the obligee (nominal obligee) recorded in the real estate register is inconsistent with the actual obligee still exists. If we directly judge the ownership of real property rights based on the presumption and credibility of registration in judicial practice, it will cause great damage to the actual obligee. Therefore, if the parties provide evidence to prove that the registration of real estate is indeed wrong.

The certificate of real estate ownership cannot be used as the only basis to prove the ownership of real estate. In this case, after the house is sold, the house is still occupied by the seller, the loan is returned by the seller, the house ownership certificate is held by the seller, and the buyer has not paid the house purchase price to the seller. It can be inferred from the above facts that the house sales contract is not the true intention of both parties.

The real situation is that the buyer applied for a bank loan for the seller on the grounds of buying a house, so the court ruled that the actual property right of the house was the seller according to the case evidence and objective facts.

Baidu encyclopedia-real estate license

People's Network-The name on the real estate license is not necessarily "owner"