Foul Play/case for legal action

GDB2222

badaz52 wrote: »

I will post the exact wording up later today but one part I do know as exact is this:

We have instructed "name of ea" to market the property on our behalf.

It never said when.

Well, they are entitled to do that with or without your permission. You are entitled to market Buckingham Palace if you like, but you'll have trouble arranging viewings.

Thrugelmir

Suggest you seek legal advice before you driving yourself insane. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

In offering the PX deal the developer took a risk themselves. As at the outset there was no certainty to the outcome. No-one could possibly foresee the outcome.

sonastin

badaz52 wrote: »

Therefore it was someones responsibility to inform me of what was going on, I had a right to know.

...

I had all the rights in the world to know what was happening to my house right up until EOC and I was kept in the dark and made a mistake on the price I paid because of this negligence.

This is the key bit of uncertainty in the whole issue. Did you have the right to know. Should the EA have informed you of the offer. It entirely depends on whether you contract with the EA was still in force. As has been said many times before, under English law there are a number of ways to end a contract. A notice in accordance with the conditions of contract is only one of those ways.

IF the PX agreement and your subsequent conduct is interpreted as bringing an end to the contract (which the EA thought it did but you didn't - until one of you changes your mind or the judge decides this issue won't be settled. It can't be decided by this forum), then you had no rights to know about any buyers who would be purchasing your house from TW once they were in legal possession of it.

It still comes down to whether the EA was contractually bound to act for you following your decision to enter into the PX agreement. Every other bit of your argument stems from your belief that he was.

decsdad

There will probably be something in the EA contract saying that their obligation to you ceases when you enter into another agreement (PX contract), or something with that meaning ?

GDB2222

decsdad wrote: »

There will probably be something in the EA contract saying that their obligation to you ceases when you enter into another agreement (PX contract), or something with that meaning ?

I've never seen anything like that in any of the contracts I've signed.

JQ.

Is everyone ignoring the white elephant in the room? - THERE IS NO LOSS.

So whilst I believe the OP's contract with the EA became null and void upon signing the px agreement, if I am wrong, then there is still nothing to claim for against the EA. Whether the OP sold the property themselves or sold it to TW the net result would be the same - the OP would receive around £140k. If TW had sold the property for £150k then there would be a loss, but they didn't.

The EA cannot be held liable for what the OP spent the money on they received from the sale of the house.

decsdad

I was just thinking aloud really.

badaz52

I have read my EA contract and all it says is that if you wish to end the contract you must give 21 days written notice.

The only thing in the EA contract that would be deemed to be a breach of contract would be if you went through with the sale with another EA you would owe them compensation for marketing costs etc. The EA was getting 1% of the final sale whether it came from me or TW so it wouldn't matter to them as the property was staying on their books.

The PX agreement couldn't have severed the original agreement as the PX was only an offer on a property. What may have happened (and probably did) was the original agreement remained in place and TW took over the contract so they would then be bound to pay the fees (under the PX agreement) but that doesn't excuse that TW at that point were not the vendors and did not own the property, when another offer came in I was not informed.

I understand TW do not have a legal obligation to pass the offer on, only the EA does and if they passed the offer on to TW I guess they have fulfilled that but the question is why didn't TW pass on that information to me? was it genuinely because they didn't feel they had to or was it because they knew if they did and I decided to pursue the independant buyer, I would alter my offer on the new build?

Would that even be plausible in court?

And the letter I sent to the EA, specifically blaming them for not passing on an offer, what did the EA do? passed the book to TW? probably because the EA did send the offer in writing and assumed that we would be informed so now they have basically transferred the complaint to TW. Even the EA seems to think TW did something wrong...

Makes you think....

badaz52

Its just the principle here that matters to me. TW can't even argue that they "found" the buyer, the buyer had already viewed the property twice previously when it was at it's full price and didn't make an offer so we thought they weren't interested. After we signed the PX agreement we didn't have one person through the door so didn't need to adhere to that part of the PX agreement about letting people they have found into the property.

It's the fact that they knew exactly who they were selling to and weren't honest and upfront about it before we exchanged. If anything, as the buyer was already known to the EA we introduced the buyer to TW!!, a gesture of good will is really all I am looking to achieve out of this.

They must have been rubbing their hands together, receiving full price for a new build, already having a buyer lined up that they didn't have to find, they did no leg work whatsoever and it only left them £1400 out of pocket. I'd say that was a good result for TW.

Completely shafted...

lincroft1710

Did you have an agreement with TW that they would pass on to you any offers they received?

Reading your last few posts gives me the impression that you want the best of both worlds, either TW are lumbered with your house which you were unable to sell, or they find a buyer, you bypass them and sell direct to the buyer. My impressions may be wrong but this is how it is coming across.