Plea to change law on 'glittering' deals for apartments

Orrin

Miss Dyer, a trainer for a mobile phone firm,

She should know all about sharp sales practice then. Not much sympathy from me I'm afraid.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

But can she be sued for more than the difference between the asking price less deposit and the current valuation?

AIUI, under most contracts of this sort she has to complete. If she is unable to do so she will be liable for any difference between the price she agreed to pay and the price for which it sells.

She will also be liable for some financing cost between the day she agreed to complete and the day the flat sale actually completes at a rate comparable to an expensive mortgage.

The_White_Horse

i am sure that if this woman agreed to buy it for 116k and then 2 yrs later, if the market had increased and the flat was then worth 150k, she would happily pay the extra.

what a c**t

Out,_Vile_Jelly

"believed she was getting a bargain as was told by the seller it was worth £137,500."

This was my favourite bit.

abaxas

You cant change the law to protect people from their own greed.

tomterm8

I feel sorry for her, because I don't think it's true that she is a 'stupid biatch' or necessarily any more greedy than any other member of the board. British people have an odd attitude towards people who are trying to improve their life.

I feel sorry for her, but we shouldn't change the entire branch of contract law on her account.

If the developer was honest, and didn't mislead her when she made the agreement, well, I really think she has to live with the consequences.

Eskimo12345

That is a very funny story. I do feel sorry for her, but only the same way I feel sorry for anyone who loses money in a bad investment.

Moral of the story: Don't invest what you can't afford to lose.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

"believed she was getting a bargain as was told by the seller it was worth £137,500."

This was my favourite bit.

Why?

4 years ago people would of paid that much for a built "executive;)" flat in Birmingham city centre.

WHITEVANMAN

michaels wrote: »

But can she be sued for more than the difference between the asking price less deposit and the current valuation?

Im not exactly sure of the details but I think it applies that as she is not currently the owner, only having exchanged contracts and paid her deposit, if she fails to complete she is in breach of that contract and could possibly be sued for additional costs and losses claimed by the seller in addition to the loss of deposit.

A quick google search provided this excerpt from Chattertons Solicitors.

If one of the parties is then not ready, willing and able to complete on the agreed
completion date, the other party can service Notice to Complete on the defaulting
party. Interest on the outstanding balance of the contract price (usually 4%
above bank base rate) will start to run from the day completion should have
taken place.
The Notice to Complete usually gives a further 10 working days for the defaulting
party to complete. If a buyer fails to complete within the extra 10 working days
the seller can rescind the contract, keep the deposit and claim any further losses
which may have been sustained as a result of the buyer’s failure to complete. If
there is a prospect that a buyer has the money to complete but is unwilling to do
so the seller can sue for specific performance of the contract or rescind the
contract and sue for damages. Please be aware that if a seller fails to complete,

the buyer can also sue for specific performance and damages.

PasturesNew

There is already sufficient protection for these type of people under the law. It's called Sectioning, under the Mental Health Act.