Vendors pull out AFTER exchange of contract

MeanManc

So despite all the whining about poverty and homelessness they have made you wait another week without offering a realistic solution.
I'm with Clutton, its a good idea to let the red mist settle before making a move.
Last week it was an arrogant "go away, homeless children will win a court case"
This week it is "go away, we're financially strapped and homeless children will win a court case"
It would solve all their problems if you would go away. As far as they are concerned it is all about them and their money situation. I wouldn't lose any sleep over them.
All the best for a happy outcome for you, whatever you decide.

GDB2222

GracieP wrote: »

WelshWoofs would be in no way responsible for them being bankrupt. If that happens they will have brought it upon themselves for their poor financial management. There is no way on earth that someone who is responsible and careful with their finances can be made bankrupt. If these people become bankrupt it will be there own fault for having, what sounds like, a history of making foolish and selfish financial decisions.

I realise you are trying to help WW out, and your advice is given with her best interests in mind. But suggesting that she may be responsible for meanly making someone bankrupt is a horrible and inaccurate suggestion.

It's looking like the vendors could go bankrupt if WW proceeds with this case and they defend it. WW has already said that there is a comparable house on the market with an asking price £40k more, so a deal might be done for £20k more, say. Would I make someone bankrupt for £20k? Not me, but your view appears to be different, and lots of people obviously agree with you! So, I'm a softy, then.

Besides that, on a purely practical basis, there is nothing worse than fighting someone who goes bankrupt on you after you have won a court case against them. You still don't get your £20k, and you are out of pocket for your legal fees, expert witness fees, etc. It's a huge gamble to take.

julieq

One of the deals offered was 10% of a purchase price of <£250K (this is below the SD threshold as previously stated). So they've essentially had that offer and rejected it.

I suspect the reason this has struck a chord is because it's about selfishness and bloodymindedness not being allowed to win over what is fair and reasonable. Let's hope that is what happens.

Romani_Ite_Domum

pinkshoes wrote: »

and unless you live in and know a specific owner well, you can't comment on or predict the prices.

Very true, could be up.... could be down in that specific postcode area.

As you commented that you didn't think the prices would be down, I take it that you know the specific area well?

satchmeister

GDB2222 wrote: »

It's looking like the vendors could go bankrupt if WW proceeds with this case and they defend it. WW has already said that there is a comparable house on the market with an asking price £40k more, so a deal might be done for £20k more, say. Would I make someone bankrupt for £20k? Not me, but your view appears to be different, and lots of people obviously agree with you! So, I'm a softy, then.

Besides that, on a purely practical basis, there is nothing worse than fighting someone who goes bankrupt on you after you have won a court case against them. You still don't get your £20k, and you are out of pocket for your legal fees, expert witness fees, etc. It's a huge gamble to take.

They would be making themselves bankrupt - dont try emotional blackmail - the sellers are already doing that themselves -'poor me - homeless'

julieq

It would be crazy to essentially make yourself bankrupt when there is no need to be bankrupt, and certainly not to prove your bloodymindedness to a buyer of your house.

It would come down to whether they're actually short of the money they need to repay their mortgage.

Welshwoofs

Lady_Hamilton wrote: »

WW, if you decide to proceed with the legal route will you not have to rent anyway, although you state you can't due to circumstances? Where will you live?

Ahh well you see we live in a completely different part of the country to where we're buying (this is a case of moving back to my childhood stomping ground where what remains of my family is). We're not selling our current property - the plan was to rent it out when we moved so until we move we'll simply have to remain on here....amongst our packing cases.

Welshwoofs

Romani_Ite_Domum wrote: »

As you commented that you didn't think the prices would be down, I take it that you know the specific area well?

In that particular area houses are going with a week or 2 now and apparently for full asking on many occasions. It looks like it's a small bubble where demand outstrips supply and that's encouraging sellers new on to market higher than 4 months ago when we had an offer accepted.

silvercar

Their problem is that if they pay you to disappear they have also lost their deposit on the new build. So they lose on both sides. Whereas if they move into the new build they (just) have a high mortgage.

I can't see how losing tens of thousands now can be preferable to moving and coping with a higher mortgage. Their options once they are in are much greater, for a start they can find an interest only mortgage elsewhere and remortgage.

Have they no-one with a brain to advise them?

Troubled_Joe

I've read through all this and as a litigator am now having nightmares about my clients seeking the advice of several hundred anonymous strangers as to how to proceed with a case but nonetheless it's an interesting read.

From the information you have given your solicitors seem to be providing sound advice so please listen to them carefully when they are providing information on costs and the risks of litigation.

Multi-track litigation (as this will most likely be) is incredibly time-consuming, lengthy and stressful and only you can put a value on the effects of that on you and your family. Costs will be considerable and unless you have BTE insurance or have a conditional fee arrangement of some kind you will need to fork out this money on an ongoing basis.

Even if you are successful and obtain a costs order (even one for indemnity costs) then it will not cover the entirety of your legal costs and you will still be out of pocket to a certain degree.

Your case undoubtedly seems strong but even here there is no guarantee of success and there is a lot to be said for achieving a settlement on your terms at an early stage.

Although you may feel a lot of resentment towards the Defendants (and rightly so) don't let it cloud your judgment in terms of the financial realities of the situation. Sad as it may be, conducting civil litigation purely as a quest for justice and what is "right" is rarely sensible.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth and I hope it's of use. Best of luck with however you decide to proceed.