Could I sue for being mis-sold

Leon_W

Developers only put a clause in the contract about the sales price to ensure that it is reasonable in the prevailing housing market. It's just a check to ensure that you are not deliberately trying to sell undervalue to a relative for instance.

My litmus test for questions such as you pose is, would you be complaining if house prices had risen and the market was more bouyant ? The answer is probably not. This leads to the assumption that you are just looking to blame someone, anyone, for a financial loss which is hardly the solicitors fault.

In your original post you describe a shared equity scheme very well. You hold a share and so does the developer, so why you now think that the developer should now have no say whatsoever in the sale price is beyond me to be honest.

As I mention earlier, it all points to looking for a scapegoat.

moneybunny123

Richard - the most sense I've read on here. Of course it was nobody's choice to rent the house out but my own. But again, only done because I couldn't find a buyer and wasn't allowed to reduce the price to FIND a buyer!

I suppose I wouldn't be willing to pay the developers their 25% out of the 65% because that would leave me with no money now (selfish, I know, BUT I am expecting a baby and the whole reason for selling now is to get out what equity I have left. A bit pointless if I'm about to sell now, but not get any money for another five years....)

USM

The thing you need to be really careful of is blurring the lines between your own personal feelings and the concerns of a solicitor and property developer.

For example, your choice to procreate is of no concern to the developer - they are entitled to their share in the same way as they would have been if you had chosen not to have a baby.

moneybunny123

Of course, and I knew that would be picked up on when I typed it. I suppose if I'm guilty of anything it's just being nice, and seeing the best in a situation, never shafting people and always treating others how I want to be treated. In my naivety, I assume everyone else is like this. Sadly, they're not. Perhaps the biggest lesson I'm learning is that I need to be as cynical and as backstabbing as others seem to be....?

tomitma

Why do women always bring up a broken relationship, to cover there own stupidity, there are scores of postings on this site, saying "Ohhh I didnt think, because I was upset I had just found my partner in bed with another woman" why cant they tell the truth and accept they were stupid, to sign this or that document with out reading it? Or blame the solicitors, or estate agents.

What I cant understand is why don't you pay the 25% out of the 65%?

Wyndham

Good job it's everyone else's fault and you have no blame at all then!

Sorry, but really - if you weren't sure you should not have gone ahead. Buyer beware comes into this, and applies to houses just as much as everything else. Except that as buying a house is a big purchase you really should spend more time on it than buying other things. And if your head wasn't in the right place for it and you couldn't cope with that, then you should have moved in with relatives/rented something/stayed with a friend etc. until you could cope with a major, legally binding, transaction.

Learn from it, and don't make the same mistakes another time.

moneybunny123

mandbaby wrote: »

I suppose I wouldn't be willing to pay the developers their 25% out of the 65% because that would leave me with no money now (selfish, I know, BUT I am expecting a baby and the whole reason for selling now is to get out what equity I have left. A bit pointless if I'm about to sell now, but not get any money for another five years....)

Tomitma - what I can't understand is stupid men who can't read other posts thoroughly.

moneybunny123

Wyndham wrote: »

Good job it's everyone else's fault and you have no blame at all then!

Sorry, but really - if you weren't sure you should not have gone ahead. Buyer beware comes into this, and applies to houses just as much as everything else. Except that as buying a house is a big purchase you really should spend more time on it than buying other things. And if your head wasn't in the right place for it and you couldn't cope with that, then you should have moved in with relatives/rented something/stayed with a friend etc. until you could cope with a major, legally binding, transaction.

Learn from it, and don't make the same mistakes another time.

What productive advice - given that I've already done the deal. Of course I've learnt from it - I'd never be so naive again - but that hardly helps me now, does it?!

Yes, I made a mistake - BUT HOW am I COMPLETELY to blame when a solicitor that I DID NOT CHOOSE DID NOT POINT OUT PITFALLS. That was all I asked to start with, but then people come on here to point out how stupid I've been. Yes, and don't I know it!! But, I really don't believe that I'm 100% to blame. I only made a decision based on the information that I was given, and I believe I wasn't given ALL the information - AND, not only that, I wasn't given CORRECT information by the sales rep.

CLAPTON

mandbaby wrote: »

Thanks for that Clapton. I'm sorry, but in my nice, caring, (niave if you like) world, I just assumed that when you PAY someone for a service, the people providing that service are obliged to point out the pros AND the cons. You hear all the time of people sueing x and y because they weren't told of this, that or the other.

What a pity that we live in the nasty, corrupt and synical world that we do. Makes you wonder why it's worth getting up in the morning if everyone is gonna try their hardest to stab you in the back.

it seems to me that it is you that are trying to change a simple, easy to understand deal for your own advantage
nothing nice or caring about it

Richard_Webster

I think you have got to get the tenants out and then try to sell. (I don't think that the fact you chose to let the property which reduces its marketability is anything to do with the solicitors - that's your choice, I'm afraid.) By then the market may have changed and the developer might agree a lower figure.

But say they still think it is worth £139K and you do sell it for £130K, they will want 25% of £139K (unless you can persuade them to accept the lower figure - which might be easier to do than with your present 65/35 staged payment sale). 25% of £139K is £34,750. 25% of £130K is £32,500. On those figures your maximum loss related to the solicitor's failure to explain is £2,250. Of course it could be more if there was a bigger discrepancy there.

The next thing is that the solicitors will say that even if they had explained about the developer having to agree the figure, which could be more than you might actually get, you would probably still have gone ahead. I can't imagine many clients finding that to be a sticking point in that situation - so on my figures the best they might offer you would be about £600 (about 25% of the loss on the basis that there was a 75% or higher chance you would still have gone ahead) as a nuisance value payment.