Study On The Legal Problems Of The Behavior Of Purchasing A House Under The Name Of Loan

"Buying houses" and "housing prices" are issues that people will discuss after dinner.The importance of housing to people's lives goes without saying.In recent years,the real estate market has been active all over the country.In order to maintain the order and security of real estate transactions,the state and local governments have promulgated corresponding laws,regulations and other normative documents.It is not unfamiliar to all of us that the "must-buy order,credit restriction order,price restriction order".The characteristics of fast value-added houses and large hidden interests make many people have profit-making ideas.In particular,the potential value-added benefits of housing prices in big cities are even greater.In judicial practice,there has always been a phenomenon of borrowed house purchasing,which is becoming more and more serious.The occurrence of this phenomenon reflects the current development of the real estate market.Overinvestment and speculation in the real estate market have led to the abnormal growth of housing prices.The number of disputes about house purchasing under the name of borrowing is increasing,and social contradictions are also increasing day by day.There are no clear regulations on the purchase of houses under borrowed names.In judicial practice,the courts deal with the cases of borrowed house purchase differently,and the same case is judged differently and the nature of the case is difficult to identify and deal with.This is not conducive to the unification of judicial decisions,but also affects the authority of the judiciary.Moreover,borrowed house purchase usually occurs between relatives and acquaintances,which is more harmful to social stability.In the theoretical circle,scholars also have a "hundred schools of thought contend" about the theory of borrowed house purchase.Therefore,we should correctly identify the nature,effectiveness and ownership of the borrowed house purchase,thoroughly analyze the borrowed house purchase behavior itself,so as to better solve the disputes of borrowed house purchase,maintain social stability and safeguard judicial authority.On the basis of previous scholars' theory,the article is more convincing.Chapter two is the question.By enumerating the cases of borrowed house purchase as a starting point,this paper summarizes the disputes in the cases of borrowed house purchase in judicial practice.The main disputes can be summarized as the legal nature of borrowed house purchase,the legal effect of borrowed house purchase and the ownership of the houses involved in borrowed house purchase.Starting from Chapter Three,the above main disputes will be resolved separately.Starting from the concept and structure of borrowed name purchase behavior,this paper defines the legal nature of borrowed name purchase behavior.According to different classifications,the nature of borrowed name purchase behavior can be defined as mixed legal act and indirect agency.Chapter IV is the identification of the legal effect of the act of borrowing a name to buy a house,according to the different types of borrowing a name to buy a house.The fifth chapter is the judgment of the ownership of the house involved in the case of borrowed house purchase.The fundamental disputes arising from the dispute of borrowed house purchase lie in that the article judges the ownership of different types of houses according to the different types of houses purchased under borrowed house purchase and the validity of the agreement,and then judges the interests of bona fide third party.The author hopes to further analyze the legal relationship involved in the act of borrowed house purchase through the above discussion,and to clarify the applicable legal norms for solving the disputes of borrowed house purchase,with a view to finding a solution in the current legal framework.