Solicitor Changed Contract After Signing!

rpc

So he has no copy of the draft contract? Even an unsigned one?

Will there be any evidence that 5k was agreed? Emails etc?

If your friend wants to take it further, he should ask for the complaints procedure from the solicitor and follow that. Onwards to the legal ombudsman or solicitor regulation authority if that fails.

I am divided over this. The contract did not represent what was agreed, but a contract is a contract. If the shoe was on the other foot, then it would be "tough" for the friend. I think the developer should end up footing the cost, but I think the solicitor is in worse trouble for changing a signed contract without reference to the purchaser.

jjlandlord

the paperwork (contract) came through and this £5K figure was noted down as £11K. Obviously he kept shtum to see how the deal went

the change after the contract being signed was not communicated.

So basically he's unhappy because he found a worthy opponent.
At least he now knows how the deal went.

silvercar

So the complaint is that the contract was changed to what had previously been agreed.

The solicitor's defence will be that he knew the client had agreed the lower incentive so there was no need to consult. The solicitor is not meant to know that your friend was hoping to pull a fast one and so confident he had already spent the proceeds. For all the solicitor knew, your friend may not even have noticed the mistake.

sho_me_da_money

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

But [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE] sorry, your friend had noticed, and were going to take advantage of the situation, until it backfired??

Yes me, sorry, my friend was going to.

Its defo not me mate, Im all kushty in a home my Gran left to me. Mortgage free baby!

sho_me_da_money

rpc wrote: »

So he has no copy of the draft contract? Even an unsigned one?

Will there be any evidence that 5k was agreed? Emails etc?

If your friend wants to take it further, he should ask for the complaints procedure from the solicitor and follow that. Onwards to the legal ombudsman or solicitor regulation authority if that fails.

I am divided over this. The contract did not represent what was agreed, but a contract is a contract. If the shoe was on the other foot, then it would be "tough" for the friend. I think the developer should end up footing the cost, but I think the solicitor is in worse trouble for changing a signed contract without reference to the purchaser.

Thanks for this.

- Unfortunately, he has no copy of the original contract. What he has is the contract that was X'ed that shows the £11K figure in the background. This amendment was not communicated nor was accepted/signed by my mate

- There will be no evidence to prove the £5K was agreed initially. This was strictly a verbal agreement prior to him selling his previous home and buying the new one.

FireWyrm

Ok, so morality aside (I think what he did was frankly wrong, but hey, it's business), does your friend OR the vendor have any definitive proof of the original £5K agreement?

If not, I'd turn it around on them. A contract is a contract and that's the bottom line. You cant just change a contract retrospectively. If there is no evidence (and I mean absolutely nothing), then I would threaten court action on the basis that you dont know for sure what else they 'ammended' in that contract after it was signed and it therefore makes it invalid. That should kick off some negotiation. I advise your friend to let himself be molified with half of the additional 6K though...lets not be greedy here, it's what got him in this mess in the first place.

JQ.

silvercar wrote: »

So the complaint is that the contract was changed to what had previously been agreed.

The solicitor's defence will be that he knew the client had agreed the lower incentive so there was no need to consult. The solicitor is not meant to know that your friend was hoping to pull a fast one and so confident he had already spent the proceeds. For all the solicitor knew, your friend may not even have noticed the mistake.

No, I believe the issue is that both parties signed the contract in it's original form (£11k), the solicitors then amended the contract without the consent of one of the signatories.

I really don't see how it can be legal to change the terms of a contract after signature without the consent of both parties, otherwise it just makes all contracts totally pointless.

Moral obligations aside, it sounds like the solicitors have messed up royally and are trying to cover their backs. I would certainly put in a complaint and push it as far as possible. I would imagine the Law Society would not be too happy with their members behaving in such underhand ways. The difficulty your friend will have is providing proof.

sho_me_da_money

Ok sorry, I just found out the £5K was noted on something called a pre reservation form. This is the only documentation that makes note of the £5K amount.

jjlandlord

FireWyrm wrote: »

A contract is a contract and that's the bottom line. You cant just change a contract retrospectively.

I might be repeating myself, but OP has seemingly no way to prove that it was, whereas there is written evidence that 5k is the correct amount.

So, again, it seems an uphill battle considering that the situation is currently as was actually agreed...

JQ. wrote: »

I really don't see how it can be legal to change the terms of a contract after signature without the consent of both parties,

Yes if to change agreed term. No if to correct mistake in order to accurately reflect agreed terms, imo.

FireWyrm

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

Ok sorry, I just found out the £5K was noted on something called a pre reservation form. This is the only documentation that makes note of the £5K amount.

Still not a contract. It could be argued that the real figure is the 11K and NOT the figure on a scrappy piece of paper. In the same vein, I as a buyer cannot take what is written in the estate agent particulars as being reality. I CAN however rely on the actual contract paperwork and THAT is what I would use in court if my vendor decided to rip out the nice shiny new cooker they listed in the contract particulars.

I take JJ's point, but I argue that a contract was formed. Just as JJ says rightly you dont have an 'original' un-doctored contract to compare against, presumably, you could use this to your advantage in any negotiation since you are also unable to compare the rest of the contract and see whether any other 'changes' have been made that you were unaware of. You *may* be able to strengthen your argument by stating that the contract was signed originally by BOTH parties who presumably BOTH flamming well read it. If NEITHER side read it, just what is the point and why didnt they put a contingency for the blood of your friends first born in there while they were at it since no-one would have spotted it.

I repeat, I would NEGOTIATE. You would probably lose in a court of law, at best, it would be 50/50 and then it would cost you fees and time etc. Play the cards you have, come on in high dugeon and see where it gets you. All they can say is 'no' and at this point, your friend is no worse off. Your friend needs however to be honest with himself over the morality of this and settle for something that is a sensible compromise.