Could I sue for being mis-sold

alexlyne

A house sale takes at least 6 weeks doesn't it... so why not keep the tenants, and then tell them you (or the EA) will be bringing around prospective buyers. If you get on with the tenants then they should be reasonable. If not give them the background behind selling, they'll feel sorry for you and be reasonable.
Yes, they will have to look for somewhere and may move out before they need to, but that's life.
Hopefully you'll sell the house (at a price not much less than the guide price), the developers will get their money that they gave YOU to enable YOU to live in that house. You'll lose out on some hard-earned, but who doesn't these days.
Then you'll have your baby and forget about the whole saga.

hazyjo

You'd be in the same boat if you owned all 100% of the property with tenants in place. You'd have to boot them out before selling, or you'd have to agree to give them two months' notice when you did find a buyer and hope they didn't find something else and hand in their own notice in the meantime. But then surely you knew this much when you put tenants in?

If you want to sell it, I don't really think you have much choice other than telling your tenants you're selling and will give them two months' notice once you've found a buyer, and hoping they don't leave in the meantime. Or you need to save up as much as you possibly can beforehand so you have something to fall back on if it sits on the market empty for a while and try selling in a year's time or something...

Jx
PS you're actually in a more fortunate position than others as, from what I understand (and not guaranteeing I'm right!), a lot others on shared equity schemes aren't allowed to rent them out.

sonastin

1) Regardless of the current ownership arrangement, I would be very wary of the 65/35 deal with the rest of the money coming "sometime in the next 5 years". What has your solicitor had to say about the proposal? How would your (and the developer's) ongoing interest in the property be safeguarded over the next 5 years? What would you do in 5 years time if the money didn't appear in your bank account? If you've accepted its time to stop being so naive, you'll have realised that you need to work on the assumption that the buyer might not pay up the rest of the cash. How do you plan to deal with that?

2) If you can afford to keep the property but things will be a bit tight, keep it, tighten your belt, keep it on the market and hope that you get a normal buyer who will offer a decent price sooner rather than later.

3) Have you done any of your own reasearch into the current value of the property? Estate agents are notoriously inaccurate with the valuations they give when they want your business and as you've said yourself, selling prices are NOT the same as asking prices. What price are similar properties actually selling for in the area? There are plenty of websites that allow you to access sold prices and you can use this evidence to persuade the developers to accept whatever offer you end up getting.

4) If you want/need to sell quickly, you'll need to evict your tenants and take the risk that it doesn't sell. If you don't want to take the risk of paying the mortgage on an empty property, you'll have to accept that it will take longer to find a buyer while you have tenants in-situ. You are the only one who knows your circumstances and the only one who can find the balance between those two positions.

5) The developer might seem like a faceless corporation but its actually made up of lots of people. If they don't prioritise their interests over yours, they'll end up going out of business and those people will be out of a job. They have assessed the risk on the terms of your agreement and they can live with it. You're now expecting them to change the terms of the agreement and take on a bigger risk (see point 1) because it suits you to do so. They haven't refused because they've got it in for you, they've refused because they are looking after themselves and their staff.

I wish you well and I hope you manage to find a resolution that works for all parties but I don't think there was any mis-selling or devious practices. I think you need to accept that you're stuck in a difficult spot and work out your best route out of it as soon as possible, and then move on.

Aquatronixjenny

evoke wrote: »

I go back to my point.

You have taken a decision to get pregnant (again) and you can't really market the property with tenants in it who are paying your mortgage. You will not be able to afford the mortgage whilst in maternity leave, by your own admission.

Had you gone down the financially responsible route of sorting out your property and financial affairs BEFORE you decided to do what you were put on this earth for, you wouldn't be in this mess, would you?

So with all of these facts, you now want to change the terms of contractual agreements that you signed to make it more comfortable for you.

You couldn't make it up.

That made me laugh a lot :rotfl: even though I'm a woman!

Seriously, to the OP. You signed a contract - its not the responsibility of the developer to make sure you understand it and its of absolutely no concern to him what your personal circumstances were either at the time or now. They are running a business.

Personally, I would keep on renting it out and sit tight, hope the prices start to go up and then test the water again.

moneybunny123

ILW wrote: »

So market it on the basis that the tenants will get two months notice if and when a sale is agreed.

I must admit, I had considered this. But then I haven't seen the inside of the house since she's been living there, and I've no idea of its condition. I've been told by the estate agents that it is in pretty good condition. But I wonder if it might appeal to more people if clean, empty and recently re-decorated.....?

moneybunny123

evoke wrote: »

I go back to my point.

You have taken a decision to get pregnant (again) and you can't really market the property with tenants in it who are paying your mortgage. You will not be able to afford the mortgage whilst in maternity leave, by your own admission.

Had you gone down the financially responsible route of sorting out your property and financial affairs BEFORE you decided to do what you were put on this earth for, you wouldn't be in this mess, would you?

So with all of these facts, you now want to change the terms of contractual agreements that you signed to make it more comfortable for you.

You couldn't make it up.

You're wrong, actually, so the "facts" you refer to are actually not the facts at all! But that probably doesn't matter to you!? As I explained before, I tried to sell the house over two and a half years ago (before I was pregnant with my first child), but couldn't find a buyer - even when I dropped the price by 10% (which at that time it was still above what I originally paid). I couldn't sell it, so rented it out instead. Hardly financially IRRESPONSIBLE, is it?! I did what I could at the time.

moneybunny123

Mallotum_X wrote: »

As you said yourself the Developers effectively gave you an interest free loan of 25% the value at that time.

Do you give the developer 25% of the rent? .

No, of course not. And nor do they provide 25% of the mortgage, or 25% of the thousands I spent on the place to improve it (fire, carpets, landscaping the garden, etc, etc, etc)

moneybunny123

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Now lets say you owned the property 100% and wanted to sell. You would have the same dilema with the tenants. Can you not speak with them and come to some sort of agreement. Perhaps you can offer them a reduced rent and keep them in whilst you market the property, but on shorter terms (lets say you offered them 25% reduction in exchange for 1 month notice plus allow you to show people round). There are pitfalls to that approach but would at least help to reduce your expose to the mortgage.

Now THIS sounds like a plan. But you have me worried with your "pitfalls" comment. Such as what? That they may put off potential buyers? Because THAT IS my biggest concern if I don't evict them.

moneybunny123

Aquatronixjenny wrote: »

Personally, I would keep on renting it out and sit tight, hope the prices start to go up and then test the water again.

This does sound like a plan, but I'm gonna have to sell it before next January, because if I don't I wont have lived there for three years, which means (unless I'm mistaken?) that I'll be liable for capital gains tax.

I genuinely thank everyone who's taken the time to reply. I think that realistically I have 2 choices:

1. Talk to the tenants, reduce their rent for the time-being on the proviso that they show potential buyers around, and I give them up to two months notice once a buyer is found.
OR
2. Bite the bullet, give them two months notice immediately, get the place spruced up at Easter, get it on the open market and pray very hard.

Anybody wanna buy a lovely 3 bed, 2 bath house with garage and off-road parking?!

CLAPTON

mandbaby wrote: »

This does sound like a plan, but I'm gonna have to sell it before next January, because if I don't I wont have lived there for three years, which means (unless I'm mistaken?) that I'll be liable for capital gains tax.

I genuinely thank everyone who's taken the time to reply. I think that realistically I have 2 choices:

1. Talk to the tenants, reduce their rent for the time-being on the proviso that they show potential buyers around, and I give them up to two months notice once a buyer is found.
OR
2. Bite the bullet, give them two months notice immediately, get the place spruced up at Easter, get it on the open market and pray very hard.

Anybody wanna buy a lovely 3 bed, 2 bath house with garage and off-road parking?!

just to say

capital gains tax is only paid on the GAIN ; currently you are showing a loss

in addition even if there was a gain, you have
- a reduction because you lived there for two year plus the last three years
- a reduction 'lettting releif' up to 40,000
and you have a yearly cgt allowance of 10,100

there is in short absolutely no possibility of paying any capital gains tax for many years