Housebuyers UK company

rozeepozee

You are most welcome, greenwich! You can see from earlier posts that I am particularly proud of my avatar - it is very... well, me! In a political sense, rather than aesthetically I hasten to add

Vital_Spark_2

davec93, I sympathise with you enormously but the way my life has been going these past few years with negligent Councail tradesmen, insurance companies and banks, I should say that I can empathise. The beasts are out there and unfortunately we are the kill.

Whatever you do, don't sell to the greedy, immoral swine. Their usual prey is probably those sufficiently unfortunate as to be facing bankruptcy if they don't sell their homes. Grrrrr! Those who seek out and gloatingly prey on the misfortune of others, gaining from that misfortune, are the scum of teh Earth.

Now for a bit of hijacking. Sorry.

Okay. rozeepozee, give us the legal low down, in general discussion form only, on Miller Homes. Can they adhere to a policy which states that the company does not compensate purchasers of their homes when the correction work they have carried out (much of it unsuccessfully, I might add,) has caused damage to the purchaser's personal property and possibly their health (re concrete dust)? I'd also be interested on the loss of entire Paternity Leave situation.

Vital_Spark_2

rozeepozee, I think that's a wee shame for teh chimp.

How about Blair mooning for Bush and Bush mooning for Blair? After all, they're both a***s

greenwich

Vital_Spark wrote:

Okay. rozeepozee, give us the legal low down, in general discussion form only, on Miller Homes. Can they adhere to a policy which states that the company does not compensate purchasers of their homes when the correction work they have carried out (much of it unsuccessfully, I might add,) has caused damage to the purchaser's personal property and possibly their health (re concrete dust)?

I am not rozeepozee and you've not given a lot of information to go on, but both the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 limit the ability of companies to bind consumers to unfair terms.

rozeepozee

Vital_Spark wrote:

. Okay. rozeepozee, give us the legal low down, in general discussion form only, on Miller Homes. Can they adhere to a policy which states that the company does not compensate purchasers of their homes when the correction work they have carried out (much of it unsuccessfully, I might add,) has caused damage to the purchaser's personal property and possibly their health (re concrete dust)? I'd also be interested on the loss of entire Paternity Leave situation.

I'd love to be able to help here but I'm not that kind of solicitor and defer to greenwich's judgment. (I avoided the commercial and property sectors and instead specialised in human rights law (amongst other things) the mental health field representing people who were detained in hospital- a recession proof industry as, sadly, during hard times, the client base increases....)

rozeepozee

Glad people like my avatar tho

greenwich

I am going to thank you again for specialising in human rights law. Not all vocations make the world a better place, but that one does.

rozeepozee

Cheers, bud. Not all lawyers are created equal and knowing that I guess neither are all EAs, double glazing salesmen nor financial advisors ...

greenwich

Anyone still interested in this thread might like to read this from yesterday's Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/consumer/story/0,,1606456,00.html

davec93

Thanks Rozeepozee,

in the letter that I sent to HousebuyersUK immeadiatley after receiving their 'offer' I included prints of 2 pages from their web site to show the 2 contradictory statements, i.e.:

“HOUSEBUYERSUK will then make a cash offer on your property though our conveyancing solicitors for the full market price” (Copied direct from their web site including the spelling mistake)

“We know the market value and we will make a reasonable and fair offer based on that.”

I also told them that I intended to refer these statments and the web site to the Advertising Standards Association and my local Trading Standards Officer.

I have heard today that they are refunding the survey fee, I had asked in my letter for the Surveyor's report to be sent to me (by return of post) but hadn't mentioned a refund.

So, I will not be out of pocket - but could have done without the waste of time!

I still intend to proceed with the matter as I believe that the statemnts in their web site are considered to be an 'inducement to buy' and a legal misrepresentation.

As well as the article in the Guardian highlighted by Grenwich, there is also an article in the November edition of Which? about National Homebuyers.

I suppose that I am lucky not to be in a desparate financial position, which, as others have said, these type of companies rely on.