Can any legal experts offer me any advice re EA contract....?

moneybunny123

BornAtTheRightTime wrote: »

Surely the EA stands to incur similar costs if they progress the case to court? In which case I would happily read from their lack of quick action that they are actually unwilling to go further.

Yes, if they lose, they will stand to lose further costs - but they can afford to. They're a huge EA firm with many offices, staff, etc and I imagine this is small potatoes to them. Win, lose, whatever.

I think my next plan of action is to give EVERYTHING to the Ombudsmen and see what they say. I don't think I'll bother with a solicitor until I absolutely have to.

I even know that the BUYERS solicitor is on our side. The EA rang him to ask when exchange took place and he refused to say and told them to mind their own business. (I know this because he told me himself and also told me that he believes the EA doesn't have a leg to stand on). They were unable to ring my solicitor that dealt with the sale as they've no idea who it was.

My question would be why did the EA need to find out the date of exchange UNLESS it had a bearing on whether a fee is payable? And we all know if the date DOES have a bearing on it, we were outside the 6 months and therefore....no fee....?

moneybunny123

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Magistrates believe the police for the facts of the case and are instructed in the law applying to the case by the clerk to the court.

So hardly a ringing endorsement of the sharpness of legal mind at your disposal there.

OK, point taken. But she does have a law degree and, technically, is qualified to be a lawyer. She just chooses to do a little JP'ing on the side whilst retired.

sonastin

Look up "contra preferentum". A very useful legal principle which says that if one side is responsible for drafting ambiguous conditions of contract, the ambiguity will be decided in favour of the other party. So if the contract isn't crystal clear on the point in question (which it isn't), the courts are pretty much obliged to decide in your favour as it is their contract.

But the ombudsman should sort all of this out for you. The fact that you had to ask for their complaints procedure 4 times will be the first nail in their coffin. The rest of their behaviour will also go against them. Chuck in the fact that the terms of the contract aren't really on their side and I can't see the ombudsman having any grounds to approve their actions.

moneybunny123

sonastin wrote: »

Look up "contra preferentum". A very useful legal principle which says that if one side is responsible for drafting ambiguous conditions of contract, the ambiguity will be decided in favour of the other party. So if the contract isn't crystal clear on the point in question (which it isn't), the courts are pretty much obliged to decide in your favour as it is their contract.

But the ombudsman should sort all of this out for you. The fact that you had to ask for their complaints procedure 4 times will be the first nail in their coffin. The rest of their behaviour will also go against them. Chuck in the fact that the terms of the contract aren't really on their side and I can't see the ombudsman having any grounds to approve their actions.

This is really good advice, thank you. I have looked up contra preferentum and quoted it in my letter to the Ombudsmen.

moneybunny123

I'm now considering just sending them a cheque for their damn 50% just to draw a line under all this and to move on with my life.

If I send them a cheque and they refuse to cash it as they want to try and pursue the full fee, is my attempt to pay likely to look good or bad if you're the Ombudsmen?

WelshNic

Why would you give someone money they're not entitled to?

moneybunny123

WelshNic wrote: »

Why would you give someone money they're not entitled to?

Why? Because, sadly, there are no guarantees in life and definitely not with this case. If a magistrate decides the EA deserve their fee, it's likely to be the full fee PLUS costs. Paying half now would draw a line under the whole, sorry debacle.

Don't get me wrong, it would stick in me to do this. I don't think they deserve their fee - even half of it - either legally or morally. But I fear it may be the simplest thing to do.

DVardysShadow

moneybunny123 wrote: »

If a magistrate decides the EA deserve their fee, it's likely to be the full fee PLUS costs.

And you would be fully entitled to blow that magistrate a big fat raspberry and tell them to stuff it. Magistrates don't decide these cases.

moneybunny123

DVardysShadow wrote: »

And you would be fully entitled to blow that magistrate a big fat raspberry and tell them to stuff it. Magistrates don't decide these cases.

Who does then, if it goes to court? Genuine question as I'd been led to believe (on this forum) that a magistrate would decide....

GDB2222

moneybunny123 wrote: »

Who does then, if it goes to court? Genuine question as I'd been led to believe (on this forum) that a magistrate would decide....

It's a civil case. Magistrates just deal with criminal cases, which is why people have told you to ignore what the magistrate said. This would be dealt with by a county court judge, who is usually a solicitor, in a very informal, tiny court room.

I am very strongly of the view that you should hire a solicitor to help you in the process of dealing with the ombudsman and settling this matter. You just don't seem cut out to be a litigant in person, and a couple of hours worth of fees may get this matter settled for you without the stress that it is evidently causing you.