I feel like I'm being conned!

KrazyFool · 30 May 2006 at 12:27PM

i feel like im getting conned too, every house we look at theres something wrong with it, and "there goes another £1000 for searches etc.

I'll be glad to see the buyers pack in force & i hope sellers are legally forced to include "Everything" that has been going on with the house & its surroundings

tomstickland · 30 May 2006 at 1:14PM

Absent landlord can be covered by indemnity insurance - a work colleague had to use this, and it didn't cost much.

73 vs 75 does sound like someone is trying to be economical with the truth. Lower your offer.

holsum · 30 May 2006 at 1:25PM

Thanks Tom I needed a bit of moral support, the EA was making me feel like I was out of order for even suggesting reducing my offer, but I'm holding steadfast!

lynzpower · 30 May 2006 at 1:29PM

this approximation stuff, to my mind is a nonesense. Do you have grounds under the misdescription of property act. If youve been lied to about it, time to take steps. Anyone know more about how to do this?

tazgirl · 30 May 2006 at 1:57PM

It does sound very dodgy - we're in the process of selling a flat with a similar length lease and we had to provide a copy of documentation confirming the length of the lease to the estate agents before they'd publish the details of the property. If the property details say they're yet to be checked/subject to confirmation then that might mean your case isn't as strong, but certainly as lynzpower says it sounds like it could be property misdescription.

If you want to justify your offer - as far as I know, the calculation of the cost of the freehold/extension of lease is based in part on the years remaining on the lease (how much the freeholder could expect in rent over this period or something) so the two years would actually make a financial difference to the cost of the freehold (don't know if this is different in the case of an absentee landlord). See here for info: http://www.lease-advice.org/levamain.htm

Jorgan_2 · 30 May 2006 at 2:16PM

tazgirl wrote:

If the property details say they're yet to be checked/subject to confirmation then that might mean your case isn't as strong, but certainly as lynzpower says it sounds like it could be property misdescription.

The EA should not quote any figures relating to the lease without first checking & confirming the details. Being told by the vendor that the lease is xx years remaining & passing this onto the potential buyer is not the done thing. The Agent would need to show due diligence, taking the sellers word for it is not good enough.

If the EA has on his details, in a bold type, not smaller than the normal type used on the page, something to the effect of 'we are told by the seller that the lease has 75 years remaining, but have seen no documentation to support this. Any interested party should ask their own legal advisor to check this information, prior to enteringinto buying the property.' That may be used as a defence as it is bold, precise & compelling. The PMA also covers verbal communication, so the EA may quote something similar. This is harder to prove what was or not said.

Back to the OP, if you want to reneg the price, do it sooner rather than later.

missile · 30 May 2006 at 3:46PM

All of this debate about missrepresentation seems irrelevant? The questions seem to be 1)Do you want the property? 2)Do YOU think it is a fair price? 3)Are you prepared to risk loosing it for 2K?