We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Foul Play/case for legal action
Comments
-
They started marketing the house at the reduced price before we had exchanged contracts, it was already on the market though with a local EA, they continued to use the same EA. Exchange was about 2 weeks before completion should have been earlier but we were running late. Completion was the 30/08/11.
Starting at the beginning, I think anybody can offer anything for sale to anybody, regardless of whether they own it. For example, I could find a buyer for the Brooklyn Bridge, but then I would also have to go to the Mayor of NYC to negotiate a sale from them. (Perhaps that's a silly example.) So, I don't think the developers have broken any laws by lining up a buyer for your home before concluding contracts with you.
However, your EAs certainly had a conflict of interest. You had no chance of selling your house at £165k whilst they were offering it at £140k for the developers. If they had interest at £140k, they had a duty to inform you and advise you what to do. You might well have done a better deal for the new-build without the part exchange. If you sue them, though, you may have trouble quantifying your precise loss, Nevertheless, I would definitely speak to a solicitor about this and try to get a no-win no fee deal, but it's the EA you should go for, not the developer. Good luck.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
Starting at the beginning, I think anybody can offer anything for sale to anybody, regardless of whether they own it. For example, I could find a buyer for the Brooklyn Bridge, but then I would also have to go to the Mayor of NYC to negotiate a sale from them. (Perhaps that's a silly example.) So, I don't think the developers have broken any laws by lining up a buyer for your home before concluding contracts with you.
However, your EAs certainly had a conflict of interest. You had no chance of selling your house at £165k whilst they were offering it at £140k for the developers. If they had interest at £140k, they had a duty to inform you and advise you what to do. You might well have done a better deal for the new-build without the part exchange. If you sue them, though, you may have trouble quantifying your precise loss, Nevertheless, I would definitely speak to a solicitor about this and try to get a no-win no fee deal, but it's the EA you should go for, not the developer. Good luck.
Thank you, with regards to the PX deal though do you think I could still have an argument on whether they actually gave a PX or an Easymover? obviously one deal has more benefits over the other or are they allowed by their T&C's to twist any negotiation as they see fit?
Cheers!0 -
From your point of view the Builder gave you PX not easy mover so your case is only against the EA (i.e. if you didn't know what happened behind the scenes there would be no problem so the builder has fulfilled their contract with you).Thank you, with regards to the PX deal though do you think I could still have an argument on whether they actually gave a PX or an Easymover? obviously one deal has more benefits over the other or are they allowed by their T&C's to twist any negotiation as they see fit?
Cheers!
It is also worth remembering that, presumably, you were happy with this deal. By all means consult a solicitor, but don't pour huge somes of money or emotion into this. If you get something extra from the EA (over what you thought you would get) - great! If you get nothing then at least you have the deal you thought you were getting.0 -
Thanks for that, we were happy with this deal but there was a long way to go before completion. When we started the PX proceedings the house was only at foundation stage, we assumed that our EA would still try to get us the best possible deal and if not the house would be sold to TW for £140k, in actual fact the house was dropped £25k so of course a previous suitor would snap it up with our EA boasting a massive price drop but yeah we never agreed to this we just agreed for TW to market it for £140,000 which we thought would be after we moved out.
IMO the house should have been marketed at about £155k and negotiations should have taken place between the 3 parties but no contact was made.0 -
Thank you, with regards to the PX deal though do you think I could still have an argument on whether they actually gave a PX or an Easymover? obviously one deal has more benefits over the other or are they allowed by their T&C's to twist any negotiation as they see fit?
Cheers!
They had a number of alternative deals, but they were not obliged to offer you any particular one. The written contract you signed is what counts.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
We signed a written contract for a PX which says we sell the house to TW, it would be interesting to see whether our house actually changed hands to them or straight to the new buyer.
It is very messy, I will seek legal advise on this but I appreciate all of your help. I'll be sure to let you know how I get on.
It will be complicated if we take action against the EA to quantify a precise loss but Wimpey had it valued at a selling price of £150k on one site and £140k on another site, it was only because we went for a cheaper house that the valuation changed no other reason.
Both TW and the EA knew it was worth more but did nothing to try and achieve more. Like you say TW did not have a duty to try and achieve the best price but the EA certainly did.0 -
Again, I don't think it matters whether TW actually had the house in their possession at all. Once they had your contract signed they were entitled to sell it on and get the new buyers effectively to complete with you. That's perfectly legal.
Just stay focussed on the EA's double-dealing. They had a clear conflict of interest, they had a legal obligation to pass on all offers that they received for the house, and they are an easy target.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
Right I've got you now.
Has anyone used http://www.doihaveacase.co.uk/claim-types/professional-negligence-parent/
Says no win no fee might be worth a call?0 -
Whichever solicitors you use, it will help you to explain the matter to them if you write it down logically with dates:
On xxx I instructed <name of EAs> to sell my house. they advised marketing at £XXX
After XX months of no interest, I started to negotiate with TW to buy one of their places on a PX basis.
Around about XXX EAs started marketing my property on behalf of TW at a reduced figure of £140k, even though they were still instructed by me. They did not discuss this with me in any way. I believe that they had considerable interest at that price and offers were made, but I have no proof of this. The EAs had an obligation to pass any offers on to me. What I do know is that the house has now been sold for £140k to one of the prospective buyers I showed around and who was introduced by my EA.
The negotiations with TW were on the basis that they would market my house at £140k, and the price I paid them for the new house was set accordingly.
Had I known that I could sell my house myself for £140k, I would have done so rather than entering into a PX agreement with TW. I estimate that I could then have negotiated a 10% lower price with TW for the new house, ie I would have saved £XXX. [This is the hard part, but have a look on the Land Registry to see what other properties sold for.]
I exchanged with TW on XXXX and completed on XXXX.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
This is a non-starter based on the benefit of hindsight. I don't think you can't demonstrate a loss so legal action won't get you anywhere.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards