Suing my solicitor - Negligence ? Help

SmlSave

hence why i asked..."was there a Water Search "

clutton_2

i have a mate in exactly this position.... he bought a house with a sewage inspection hatch in the garage - but the garage had been converted into a room by the earlier owner, and turned into a dining room . he has put down wooden flooring in such a way that it will be easy to get it up if there should ever be a problem..

i know this does not solve the legalities.. but it is a practical solution ..... for access at least

your main issue is goin g to be whether there was a "concrete bridge" built over the pipework to protect it from the weight of the conservatory - if not .. then you could have poo where you dont want it sooner than you think......

FTBFun

I thought a water utilities search was usually carried out by the buyer's solicitor? I have one for the property I am purchasing.

legalhelp

It came up on the water searches done by my buyers solicitor and therefore should been clear when my solciitor did his search for me to buy ? It is a 2 storey extension rather than a conservatory. In addition my estate agents feel that my property will now be difficult to get to completion on. As the build over agreement states they can pull the extension down at any time should they need to access the pipes.

Richard_Webster

It came up on the water searches done by my buyers solicitor and therefore should been clear when my solciitor did his search for me to buy ? It is a 2 storey extension rather than a conservatory. In addition my estate agents feel that my property will now be difficult to get to completion on. As the build over agreement states they can pull the extension down at any time should they need to access the pipes.

Did your solicitor do a water search? If he didn't did he explain what a water search might show?

If he did do a search did he know there was a conservatory? Why?

What does the "covenant" which is apparently so important actually say?

SmlSave

It came up on the water searches done by my buyers solicitor and therefore should been clear when my solciitor did his search for me to buy ?

Water searches are not compulsory, your solicitor would have given you the choice to get one done.

HIP's had them included but that was (now) a one time thing only

Did you have a Water Search done?

timmyt

SmlSave wrote: »

Water searches are not compulsory not the point, the majority of conveyancers do them so the test of negligence is would the reasonable conveyancer have done one....oops, your solicitor would have given you the choice to get one done.

HIP's had them included but that was (now) a one time thing only

Did you have a Water Search done?

see in red above

timmyt

tbs624 wrote: »

For someone who posts stating that he is a solicitor, you perhaps need to read the OP more thoroughly - see this bit:
My highlighting. Are you suggesting that other members of the profession would fail to pick that up, as well as missing the original covenant?

course they would my naive poster. most 'headset charlie conveyancers' would. we see such bad conveyancing when we try to sell properties handled by cheap conveyancers...you only see the !!!! up when you sell, but posters on this website give me a chuckle when they say their conveyancer was good but also cheap. how do they know....the defects will rise on sale.

and the OP is very confusing.

you talk about a restrictive covenant, then you talk about getting planning permission...which is it? and what does planning have to do with it.

if there is a building over a sewer, then the issue is just one of access. most can be rodded through anyway. you need to emply a solicitor who will be intelligent enough to make the buyer realise they need to take a view. how many times has any of us had to have access to their swer...er...never