Vendors pull out AFTER exchange of contract

Welshwoofs

JayZed wrote: »

As a matter of interest, do you know if they've exchanged contracts on the house in London that they want to buy?

Not a clue on that one - they simply talk about costs relating to property purchase. If they did exchange contracts they're going to be royally screwed

Welshwoofs

RabbitMad wrote: »

do you have a right move link to the propery so we can all have a nosey?

I just checked and it's not showing on Rightmove even when you tick the 'sold' option. I also plugged the postcode into propertysnake and that didn't come up with it. Would EAs remove them once contracts are exchanged?

dippydog_2

More likely they have removed it due to the fact they ALSO stand to lose out in all this as they now won't get their fee either without a lot of chasing...

Awful situation, I do feel for you.

Dinah93

Nothing useful to have, but I am absolutely horrified that they could do this to you. They are arguing against using a higher than desired mortgage rate (hate to see them once rates start climbing again) against the fact they tried to make your family homelss. Speachless.

chickmug

Welshwoofs wrote: »

Would EAs remove them once contracts are exchanged?

Just to answer this small point but speaking for how we did things. It would of stayed until legal completion then taken off.

chewmylegoff

perhaps worth a letter before action from your solicitor to theirs stating that they have 48 hours to complete on the original terms otherwise the sale will be forced.

geoffky

Beware of getting caught up in the fog of war.....the people who only win are the soliciters and thier costs are £150ph or more in civil cases..

GDB2222

FairyElephant wrote: »

GDB2222, whilst I see what you are saying, I don't think it applies if the OP is going to legally enforce the sale as they have said, they won't be suing the vendors, so the vendors financial position is not really a concern of the OP.

Suppose the house has a mortgage of £400k on it and the vendors agreed to sell to the OP for £380k. The lenders have a charge over the property that will need to be cleared on completion. So, that will need the £380k from the OP plus £20k from the vendors. If the vendors don't have £20k, it's pretty pointless for the OP to sue for specific performance of the contract through the courts. The lender's charge takes precedence over any rights the OP may have. Of course, the OP could stump up the extra £20k themselves, but they don't want to do that.

I'm puzzled why you think the OP would not be suing the vendor? Who else would the OP be suing?

chickmug

geoffky wrote: »

Beware of getting caught up in the fog of war.....the people who only win are the soliciters and thier costs are £150ph or more in civil cases..

So very true and bear in mind it is doubtful the solicitor handling the conveyance will be able to do this work as it would need more specialisation. The senior solicitors turn their noses up at conveyancing as it is low profit.

I know of the odd one who would do the work for free, to a point, as their firm had been instructed to do the conveyancing. Because they feel a moral obligation especially to long establsihed clients.

GDB2222

geoffky wrote: »

Beware of getting caught up in the fog of war.....the people who only win are the soliciters and thier costs are £150ph or more in civil cases..

Agreed. It's almost always cheaper to reach a compromise. The OP has to overcome two obstacles:

1. Win the law case (well that's probably a dead cert)
2. Ensure that the defendant is solvent at the end of it (very far from certain IMHO).

Even so, the OP won't get all his costs paid, it will take a year or more, and the OP will be in limbo in the meantime. The vendor may even get repo'd in the middle of this process.