[Direct answer]In principle, this is not allowed. After the property is sealed up, the registration authority will restrict the handling of transfer registration. Unauthorized disposition of the property generally does not have the effect of changing the ownership right, and cannot be used against the applicant for enforcement. However, the buyer who meets the statutory conditions may request to exclude the forced execution, thereby protecting the property and handling the transfer of ownership: if a valid written sales contract has been signed before the seizure, all or most of the purchase price has been paid, the buyer has legally occupied the house, and the transfer registration has not been handled due to the buyer's own reasons, the buyer may claim to exclude the execution according to the relevant judicial interpretations. For consumers who purchase their only housing, more lenient conditions apply.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

Buying a house with full payment and moving in, only to have the house seized by the court due to the developer's external debts and the delay in obtaining the property ownership certificate, is the most worrying situation for buyers. At this time, the house is registered under the developer's name, and the applicant for enforcement requests continued execution. The buyers only have the contract, payment receipts, and evidence of moving in. Similarly, there are cases of seizure due to the seller's debts in second-hand house transactions, and the name-lending buyers being subject to forced execution. Whether the transfer of ownership can be completed depends on whether the buyer's rights can prevail against the applicant for enforcement. For related ideas, please refer to the following article:Property sales and construction projects.

II. Key points of contention

First, the nature and priority of rights. Real estate property rights are subject to registration. Buyers who have not completed the transfer formalities enjoy a right of claim for debt. Whether they can avoid enforcement depends on whether they meet the exceptional conditions stipulated in the judicial interpretation. Second, the determination of the four essential elements. Whether the signing time precedes the seizure, whether the purchase price has been fully paid, whether the buyer actually possesses the property, and whether the failure to transfer ownership can be attributed to the buyer—each of these factors could determine the outcome of the case. Third, special protection for consumers of sole-occupancy housing. Consumers of commercial housing enjoy more favorable conditions in terms of sole-occupancy housing in divorce cases and the proportion of payment for the purchase price. Fourth, procedural path. Third parties need to first file an objection to enforcement, and if they are dissatisfied with the ruling on the objection, they can then file a lawsuit against the enforcement objection for substantive review.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

This case involves a third-party objection to enforcement. On June 6, 2016, Xiao Liu signed a "Sale and Purchase Contract for Ready-to-Use Commercial Housing" with Beijing * Real Estate Development Co., Ltd., purchasing the house with a full payment of 8,105,805 yuan. On the same day, the two parties signed a "Agreement", stipulating that the connected underground garage, exterior decoration of the house, and courtyard project would be provided for a total price of 1,894,195 yuan. The total actual purchase expenditure was 1 million yuan. After the developer delivered the house, Xiao Liu moved in immediately. In June 2022, due to the developer's unpaid debts and the house not having a property ownership certificate, the court sealed off the house. Xiao Liu raised an objection to enforcement, and the court ruled to suspend enforcement. The applicant for enforcement, * Asset Management Co., Ltd., disagreed and filed a lawsuit on the grounds that the payment of the purchase price occurred before the contract was signed, that Xiao Liu's spouse owned another house in Chaoyang District of Beijing, and that the house in question had not been registered online. The lawyer representing Xiao Liu argued in court that the seizure occurred on June 28, 2022, which was much later than the signing and delivery of the contract. The purchase agreement could be regarded as a legally valid commercial housing sales contract and had been actually performed. At the time of purchasing the house, Xiao Liu was single and unmarried, with no other property under her name. The house was used for family living, meeting the conditions for excluding enforcement for consumer buyers. The house owned by her spouse was purchased before marriage, was small in size, and located dozens of kilometers away, which was not sufficient to deny her housing needs. The failure to transfer ownership was due to the developer's delay for reasons such as the expiration of the pre-sale license, not the buyer's own fault. The court accepted the lawyer's arguments, holding that Xiao Liu at least met the conditions stipulated in Article 28 of the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Handling of Enforcement Objections and Review Cases by People's Courts", and ruled to dismiss the plaintiff's request for continued enforcement, thus preserving the house. The case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Chen Mei'eAttorney (practice license number: 11101201911105336, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

According to Article 28 (Four Conditions for General Buyers to Exclude Enforcement) and Article 29 (Conditions for Buyers of Commercial Housing to Exclude Enforcement) of the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Handling of Enforcement Objections and Review Cases by People's Courts" (Fa Shi [2015] No. 10, amended in December 2020), and Article 209 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (Real estate rights take effect upon registration, implemented on January 1, 2021). Suggestions: First, handle online signing and transfer of ownership as soon as possible after signing the contract, and do not delay the certificate issuance for a long time; Second, keep the sales contract, payment receipts, and delivery and occupancy evidence in full to form a chain of evidence showing that the transaction has already taken place before the seizure; Third, immediately file an enforcement objection after receiving the seizure notice to avoid missing the deadline; Fourth, if the objection is rejected, promptly file a lawsuit for enforcement objection for substantive review; Fifth, if the case involves co-ownership, resettlement, or inheritance shares, clarify the ownership of the rights simultaneously and, if necessary, seek legal assistance through legal procedures.Specialised legal servicesCoordinate and plan things in an organized and efficient way to achieve the best results with the least effort.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Seizing the property does not mean there's no hope for transfer, but the initiative lies with evidence rather than emotions. In the judicial practice of Beijing courts, the order of signing the contract and seizing the property, the proportion of payment of the purchase price, the actual possession status, and the responsibility for the non-transfer of ownership are the core review points. The earlier the evidence is fixed, the more beneficial it will be. There are two points worth noting: Firstly, although buying a house under someone else's name may be convenient for the moment, the borrowed name only creates an internal creditor's right and generally cannot resist a bona fide applicant for enforcement. The house registered under the name of the debtor may still be subject to enforcement. Secondly, if a third party asserts rights, they must do so within the statutory period through objections and litigation against objections. Otherwise, they will lose the opportunity for relief. Checking the ownership of the house and the status of the seizure before purchasing the house is the most cost-effective way to prevent risks.Beijing Henglu Law FirmTip: The key to preserving your property is to prove that you meet the exceptional conditions set by the law for buyers.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Is it likely that the proposal to exclude the execution will succeed?

It depends on whether all four conditions are met. If the contract has been signed, the payment has been made, the tenant has moved in, and the ownership transfer has not been completed before the seizure, and it is not the tenant's fault, the support rate will be higher; if there is only a contract but no payment or possession, it will be more difficult to get support.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare?

Written sales contracts, proofs of full or partial payments, materials related to the delivery and occupation of the property, records of property water and electricity payments, communication records regarding the prompt handling of title transfers, and certificates proving that the property is the only residence of the family.

Q3: How much does it cost?

The litigation fees for filing an objection and a lawsuit challenging an objection shall be charged based on the subject matter or type of case, and shall be borne by the losing party. The attorney's fees shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of the power of attorney contract, and the fees related to preservation of evidence shall be calculated based on the actual expenses incurred.

Q4: How long does the process take?

The court handling the execution objection generally reviews the ruling within 15 days. First-instance litigation of objections usually takes three to six months, and the appeal period may be even longer. It is advisable to initiate the process as soon as possible.

Q5: What should I do first?

First, check the order of the time of seizure and your own contract signing, payment, and move-in, and organize them into a complete chain of evidence. Then, file an objection to enforcement as soon as possible to avoid missing the procedural deadlines.

This article is written based on the common judicial interpretations in the Beijing area. If the case occurs in other regions, it is recommended to consult local lawyers to verify the regional differences.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes·Attorney Chen Mei'e·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is provided for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In the event of a dispute, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.