Help needed Re Indemnity Policies

Lisa_Atkinson

Hi All

I am in the process of selling my property, we are all ready to complete but our buyers solicitors are being really pedantic raising quetions that have previously been answered.

Their first question was to provide proof that we have the right to use the mains water supply, even though the mains water is on a public highway and maintained by the waterboard. Because we couldnt provide written proof that we were allowed to have water we have had to agree to an indemnity policy at a cost to us of £150.

Then thinking everything was all ready to go AGAIN, they spring up with another question asking for building consents from an extention built in the 1980'S by the owner before us who was my grandfather is now desceased (the extension i might add was built by my fathers building firm and he assures me it was signed off by a building inspector). We dont have any copies of building regs and our solicitor has said due to the age of the extension we shouldnt have any issues. They are however asking us to sign another indemnity policy for the lack of building regs. We never had any of these issues when we bought the place in 2005.

Is this common practice for nearly 30 year old extensions? The people buying our house are cash buyers and havnt had a survey and we know the couple very well buying it and they have known the property for many years as their parents live next door! So i find it hard to get my head around why we are being asked to pay for this ridiculous policy. They say that because the local authority search hasnt brought anything up showing any previous consents there arent any, could it not be that our local council havnt got records from that long ago?

I have read about the 4 year rule, extensions, alterations after 4 years the council have lost the right to question it, is this correct, in the 30 yrs the extentions been up the council hasnt knocked on the door once!!!!?

If anyone could clarify if i should be accepting this policy or is it down to our buyers to kindly say to their solicitor to drop the enquiry?

Thanks

pmlindyloo

Hi and welcome

This is such a common problem - if you do a search you will find many similar threads.

I think I am right in saying that mortgage companies are often the people behind the request for indemnity policies so I can only assume, since you have cash buyers, then it is the solicitors.

To be honest, it seems to me that your buyers are being 'led' by their solicitors so may not 'back down'.

As much as it is, in my opinion, totally ridiculous in your case, and, from what I remember, doesn't give your buyers any great protection, I would be inclined just to pay for the indemity policies and be shot of the whole thing.

Good luck!

ps I'm sure the more qualified people will be along to explain fully.

timmyt

Lisa_Atkinson wrote: »

Hi All

I am in the process of selling my property, we are all ready to complete but our buyers solicitors are being really pedantic raising quetions that have previously been answered.

Their first question was to provide proof that we have the right to use the mains the buyers will do a CON29DW which will confirm the position water supply, even though the mains water is on a public highway and maintained by the waterboard. Because we couldnt provide written proof of what....this is a first in my career, so dont waste your money and get your lawyer to earn his byt telling the other lawyer to do his job! also not be that we were allowed to have water we have had to agree to an indemnity policy at a cost to us of £150.

Then thinking everything was all ready to go AGAIN, they spring up with another question asking for building consents from an extention built in the 1980'S by the owner before us who was my grandfather is now desceased (the extension i might add was built by my fathers building firm and he assures me it was signed off by a building inspector). We dont have any copies of building regs and our solicitor has said due to the age of the extension we shouldnt have any issues. Correct, after such time, it is totally a matter of survey, as COuncil can take no action unless their is a danger to health and safety They are however asking us to sign another indemnity policy for the lack of building regs. That is inapporpriate and shows up the Buyers lawyer as junior and out of their depth We never had any of these issues when we bought the place in 2005.

Indemnity policies came about because outfits opened up doing conveyancing without employing 'solicitors' who know the law. These outfits came up against an issue and paniced where a solicitor would have dismissed the issue. As a result, clever insurers thought, there is no risk and so to help these idiot conveyancers we'll take their money and offer them a policy.

Is this common practice for nearly 30 year old extensions? Nope, very poor conveyancers seek them The people buying our house are cash buyers and havnt had a survey and we know the couple very well buying it and they have known the property for many years as their parents live next door! They probably went cheap and got an outfit not employing a solicitor or anyone legally qualified. So i find it hard to get my head around why we are being asked to pay for this ridiculous policy. They say that because the local authority search hasnt brought anything up showing any previous consents there arent any, could it not be that our local council havnt got records from that long ago?

I have read about the 4 year rule, extensions, alterations after 4 years the council have lost the right to question it, is this correct, in the 30 yrs the extentions been up the council hasnt knocked on the door once!!!!? 4 years for lack of planning, 12 months for lack of builing control (unlessdanger to health and safety)

If anyone could clarify if i should be accepting this policy or is it down to our buyers to kindly say to their solicitor to drop the enquiry?

Thanks

I would write and say, following receipt of your two enquiries, we must ask that you pass the file to a more senior member of your conveyancing Team, as the requests are wholly unreasonable and unneseccary, and our clients will not entertain indemnity insurance in lieu of your clients commissioning a CON29DW and for 30 year old building works.

Please thereafter revert with an immediate exchnage.

timmyt

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Hi and welcome

This is such a common problem - if you do a search you will find many similar threads.

I think I am right in saying that mortgage companies are often the people behind the request for indemnity policies nothing to do with them it is down to finding a solution to a legal issue, but none appear in OPs case so I can only assume, since you have cash buyers, then it is the solicitors.

To be honest, it seems to me that your buyers are being 'led' by their solicitors so may not 'back down'. correct, though no solicitor would be asking, that is the problem. people want cheap conveyancing so they get idiots littering the market place and slowing it all down for the rest of us

As much as it is, in my opinion, totally ridiculous in your case, and, from what I remember, doesn't give your buyers any great protection, I would be inclined just to pay for the indemity policies and be shot of the whole thing. that is one option when you are up against invincible ignorance

Good luck!

ps I'm sure the more qualified people will be along to explain fully.

good luck OP