Threatening letter from unsuccesful buyer

toffe

this thread does seem to just spinning aroung in circles now.

I'd say the o.p. has heard enough now, they can either be a moral saint and pay up or tell them to whistle for it (i'm not a moral saint so i'd do the latter and i don't care who approves and who doesn't no one has ever been so generous as to bung me £5,000 they didn't have to)

If the buyer in question thinks they have a case let em take it to court, if i was the o.p. i'd just be throwing any future letters in the bin.

pawpurrs

From the other perspective......

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/22662885#Comment_22662885=

As I have said before on this thread and that, the soliceter has been negligant here, in this case.

zzzLazyDaisy

That's not the same at all.

In the other thread the sellers solicitor sent a contract out without informing the second purchaser that a contract had already been sent out to the first purchaser.

That is against law society rules as that counts as a contract race and all parties must be informed.

In the case that this thread is discussing, the second purchase was put on hold before a contract was sent out, which is not against the rules.

pawpurrs

Well I disagree, in both cases the buyer was a previous one, and in both cases the first buyers, for some reason came back and went on to buy the property. And in all cases there should only ever be one contract at a time, unless all partys are aware that there is more than one person attempting to buy a property.

RX-78

This is an extract from Solicitors Regulation Authority;

Dealing with more than one prospective buyer in a conveyancing transaction - 10.06

• 42.When you are acting for a seller and are asked to "deal" with more than one prospective buyer you must comply with 10.06. "Deal" means any communication you have with any of the relevant parties intended to progress the matter - for example, the sending of a draft contract or a plan of the property. Communicating information of an estate agency nature, such as sending out particulars of sale or showing prospective buyers around a property, would not amount to "dealing" for the purposes of 10.06. If you provide information for an estate agent or Home Information Pack provider only as part of the creation of a Home Information Pack, you will not have "dealt" with prospective buyers for the purpose of 10.06. However, providing additional information to buyers, either direct or through the estate agent or Home Information Pack provider, will normally amount to "dealing".
  
• 43.This requirement is sometimes known as the "contract races" rule. This has created the impression that when a transaction is proceeding under such terms, whichever party presents their contract ready for exchanging first is the "winner". In fact, the terms of the arrangement are entirely at the discretion of the parties and speed may or may not be a factor. You should be careful to agree the terms of the arrangement.
  
• 44.If you are required to inform another conveyancer of your intention to proceed with two or more prospective buyers, you should do so immediately by the most suitable means. If the information is given in person or on the telephone, there is no requirement that the details be confirmed in writing but this is advisable.
  
• 45.Special care should be taken when dealing with unqualified conveyancers or unrepresented buyers. See notes 2 and 3.
  
• 2.Particular care should be taken when you are dealing with a person who does not have legal representation. You need to find a balance between fulfilling your obligations to your client and not taking unfair advantage of another person. To an extent, therefore, 10.01 limits your duty to act in the best interests of your client. For example, your duty may be limited where an unrepresented opponent provides badly drawn documentation. In the circumstances you should suggest the opponent finds legal representation. If the opponent does not do so, you need to ensure that a balance is maintained between doing your best for the client and not taking unfair advantage of the opponent's lack of legal knowledge and drafting skills.
  
• 3.You should take care, when dealing with an unrepresented third party, that any help given does not inadvertently create a contractual relationship with that party. For further information see Cordery on Solicitors. See also note 3 of the guidance to rule 2 (Client relations). You should also be careful, when dealing with unqualified persons, that you are not involved in possible breaches of the Solicitors Act 1974, in terms of the prohibitions relating to reserved work. For further details see 20.01 (Reserved work and immigration work) and the guidance to that rule.
  

It Clearly says the solicitor needs to contact the parties involved as soon as he becomes aware of the dealings, regardless of if there is an actual contract or not.

Mouseman

Only if the seller's solicitor was in fact dealing (as set out above) with the second buyers. If the seller didn't proceed with sending out a contract (ie via their solicitor), the solicitor wasn't dealing with the second buyers, possibly never knew there was another interested party and thus couldn't have told anybody about a contract race?

Sounds from what I've read that the second buyers were simply naive to proceed WITHOUT a written acceptance of offer?

I don't see the OP as such a terribly bad person in all of this but ho hum!

RX-78

Its not clear from the OP's post if a conveyancer was instructed or not. I'm assuming it was more than likely reading between the lines - the fact FTB moved very quickly (as stated in the post) and sent surveyor around within a week.

Of course its a guess, just as much as its a guess to assume they didn't appoint one.

new_home_owner_3

Milliewilly wrote: »

Nice comment..... dreadful spelling and grammar says a lot.

Of course they paid the extra £15K thats why the sale proceeded. How can you conclude they could have got the house £15K cheaper when your offer was already on the table (for you to be gazumped)? They would have had to have paid more than £180K to win the house so not £15K cheaper at all.

.

They could have offered 15000 pound more then reneogotiated after having the survey, ive seen it happen loads of times.

I know for a fact the offers that are at first accepted are usually knocked down after the survey and im someone with !!!!!! grammar and spelling.

Good luck with your house sale..:mad:.;)

not_loaded

RX-78 wrote: »

This is an extract from Solicitors Regulation Authority;
Dealing with more than one prospective buyer in a conveyancing transaction - 10.06

• 42.When you are acting for a seller and are asked to "deal" with more than one prospective buyer you must comply with…
  …the Solicitors Act 1974, in terms of the prohibitions relating to reserved work. For further details see 20.01 (Reserved work and immigration work) and the guidance to that rule.

It Clearly says the solicitor needs to contact the parties involved as soon as he becomes aware of the dealings, regardless of if there is an actual contract or not.

It seems highly likely the solicitor wasn’t fully aware of the OP’s shenanigans. If he/she were, then I guess things would’ve panned out differently.

Milliewilly wrote: »

…I am deducing (maybe wrongly) that the OP effectively told her solicitor the FTB'er deal was dead and to proceed with the original £10Ker so the solicitor would have been quite correct not to notify of a contract race and issue a second contract to the FTB'er.
Again there's nothing illegal here that the FTB'er can claim for.

Assuming we have our facts straight (and that’s a huge assumption here) with the solicitor being legally not morally, obliged to inform the buyers that they are in a contract race, and being lied to/deceived by the OP preventing him/her from doing so, it appears the FTBers could claim against the solicitor, and the solicitor subsequently uses the OP’s silence (or lying) in a counterclaim against her, to settle their losses.

hermum

The OP knew that she was acting in an underhand way, else she wouldn't have asked the EA to keep the FTB on the back boiler.
To whoever quoted my earlier post, maybe I am a fool. However I like to treat others how I would like to be treated.
Buying a repo is entirely different, my daughters first property was a repo. She was told that the notice would go in the paper, a developer then offered and she ended up paying around 10% extra. However she was aware that she would be likely to be in that situation but once her offer was accepted as the highest, she knew that she would be buying it.
I know that the OP has moved to somewhere with cheaper property prices. I'm very surprised though that the she thinks her employment opportunities will be better there.
I would also love the FTB to be on this forum so that we could hear their side of the story.
After the way the OP conducted this non sale, I would go outside to check if she told me it was raining.