Confused...

Yorkie1

Oh hang on, rewind a moment. I had wrongly thought that the house you are buying has tenants in it (mis-read your original post). In fact, it's the sellers who are moving into a house with tenants in it. So next step up the chain.

In this situation, I'd be putting maximum pressure on your sellers to move into rented asap and exchange / complete with you without delay. That gives them the flexibility to wait until the house they want is a) vacant and b) done up properly - without you breathing down their necks and losing your mortgage etc.

They really do want their cake and to eat it.

Speak to the EA.

tim123456789

Yorkie1 wrote: »

The sellers cannot guarantee that their tenants will actually leave on the date expected. If - and it happens rarely but it does happen - this occurs, they will have to go to court to evict the tenants. This can build a delay of up to an additional few months into the process (depending on the listing delays at the local court).

If the tenants are not leaving until July, it sounds as though they are on a 12-month contract and either there is no break clause allowing the LL to ask them to leave early, or there is but the LL is unwilling to exercise it. Have they indicated whether this is the case? I do wonder what they thought they were doing, putting the house on the market within a couple of months max of starting a 12 month tenancy.

?

They wanted to sell to a LL with tenant in situ and instead got someone who "fell in love" with the house who wanted it to buy it to occupy

I see this sort of thing all the time.

In one case there was a property that seems ideal to my requirements except that it was marked as "investors only" because it had a tenant in situ, so I ignored it (assuming tenants had a long lease).

About a year later it was marketed again, still for investors only, but when I looked at the RM history for the postcode saw that in the intervening period it has been available for rent.

Seems that the owners want rid of it but can't afford to keep it un-tenanted whilst they try and sell.

(at least the stupid !!!!!!s should market it as "tenant on short lease" so that I can buy it and give them notice if I really want to - waiting wouldn't bother me, just as long as the tenants pay their rent)

kellye14

We managed to get the seller to agree to exchange in feb/early march and complete in July with a fixed date. So now the bank is going to send a surveyor out this week to valuate the house.

The seller has done a garage conversion with the wall between garage and kitchen removed completely. We asked them whether it is a load bearing wall they said they do not know and when we ask them whether there is any building regulations done they said they dint think they need to and ask us to deal with this via their solicitor directly as she would have all of the information.

The house is a three years old new build and the seller is the first had buyer. We asked the surveyor to carry out a full survey but the surveyor said there is no point because they cannot tell whether the conversion is done propertly and a beam has put in because everything is cover up.

So we are not sure what we should do once again - whether we should pull out or we should have the valuation done and hope the surveyor will be able to tell us more.

Should I contact the developer and see whether they have the original structural plan so we can find out which wall is a load bearing wall?
Any suggestion is welcome thanks again in advance.

tom9980

It is likely it is a load bearing wall simply because it usually is an outside wall without knowing the property layout we cannot be sure. The fact that the seller has had the work done and hasnt had building regs in to check the work is a huge red flag, they should also know if they had a beam put in because its not a simple job!

JimmyTheWig

kellye14 wrote: »

We asked the surveyor to carry out a full survey but the surveyor said there is no point because they cannot tell whether the conversion is done propertly and a beam has put in because everything is cover up.

If it hasn't got building regs then I would assume that it hadn't been done correctly.
You can get building regs done retrospectively, but I would imagine that that would involve exposing the beam (if there is one). Or you could get a beam put in and get building regs done at the time.