Can solicitor request mortgage funds before exchange?

ACG

If this was so important to you, why did you not ask the solicitor before using them is this would be a possibility?

It is possible to exchange and complete on the same day but as the other posters have said, you can request it but if the lender or solicitor do not want that then there is not a lot you can do.

I think as Dave says, £1100 will presumably include disbursements, a large part of that £1100 will get paid out to other people.

JimmyTheWig

GeekDom wrote: »

My reason for wanting this was my sister was in an identical position, and the vendor decided they wanted to look for a house to buy after she had exchanged and commited to the purchase. I want to avoid that scenario.

Once you have exchanged, everything is set in stone. If they then decide they want to look for a house to buy they can, but that doesn't mean that they don't have to move out onthe day that has been set as completion date on exchange.

GeekDom wrote: »

I don't mind if the solicitor requests funds 2 weeks in advance , as long as he can exchange/complete on the same day.

But what fees would then be due if things went wrong and you couldn't exchange on that day?

GeekDom wrote: »

£1100 in conveyancing fees says I am !!!

Which is fair enough if, for that £1100, you agreed that they would exchange and complete you in the same day. If you are paying for their standard service then that's what you will get. And if their standard service doesn't include exchange and completion on the same day you won't get that unless they agree to it.

GeekDom

Dave_Ham wrote: »

A novice coming in and asking to exchange and complete on the same day can often ring alarm bells to Solicitors and therefore lenders.

Someone not confident in their mortgage offer would feel much more comfortable in this manner and therefore hence the alarm bells.

Surely with today's mortgage market, no-one can be confident in their mortgage offer!

When your Sister had an issue, surely when she exchanged she had a date that all parties must complete by to prevent the vendors from doing this??

Yes, a completion date was agreed, but the vendor decided they were now in a position to purchase another house. The only option was to sue for extra costs, but north worth the hassle.

Dave_Ham

GeekDom wrote: »

Surely with today's mortgage market, no-one can be confident in their mortgage offer!





Yes, a completion date was agreed, but the vendor decided they were now in a position to purchase another house. The only option was to sue for extra costs, but north worth the hassle.

Mortgage offers only get pulled in the case of dishonesty, fraud, gross negligence or a significant impact on credit file. 99.9% of mortgage offers remain, therefore assuming yours is based upon none of the above this is not a valid reason.

Why not sue, will be a straightforward case given that they are legally contracted to complete before the specific case.

Cannot believe you can have full facts, as again this is incredibly unlikely.

Good luck with the purchase.

GeekDom

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Mortgage offers only get pulled in the case of dishonesty, fraud, gross negligence or a significant impact on credit file. 99.9% of mortgage offers remain, therefore assuming yours is based upon none of the above this is not a valid reason.

Thanks for the reassurance. I can see from your sig that you are a mortgage advisor. Have you ever had a mortgage 'pulled' between exchange and completion?

Dave_Ham

Nope, as get it right first time as the consequences are severe.

This is why I was surprised your Sister did not pursue her case, but hey ho everyone entitled to their opinion.

GeekDom

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Nope, as get it right first time as the consequences are severe.

This is why I was surprised your Sister did not pursue her case, but hey ho everyone entitled to their opinion.

She was a FTB and the thought of having to pay legal fees to persue extra costs, with no guarantees of amount of compensation was not worth the extra stress. I think the vendor used her position to strengthen their 'I'm ready to buy' position on their next property.

zarf2007

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Nope, as get it right first time as the consequences are severe.

This is why I was surprised your Sister did not pursue her case, but hey ho everyone entitled to their opinion.

I do like how 'just sue them' rolls off peoples lips, but even if you are in the right it doesnt help you when you have to pay legal fees, cancel removals that were booked after exchange and also probably pay more rent to stay where you are...not to mention the time and stress to pursue it.

its all up front costs that some people dont have. again, it makes a mockery of the legal system that even if you are right, you cannot afford to enforce it.

Dave_Ham

To be honest, I do not take suing someone lightly; but nor do I entering into a contract that is not adhered to.

To be honest I find it really difficult to accept that someone would exchange contracts just to put themselves into a better bargaining position and run the risk of being sued.

Still there you go

JimmyTheWig

zarf2007 wrote: »

I do like how 'just sue them' rolls off peoples lips, but even if you are in the right it doesnt help you when you have to pay legal fees, cancel removals that were booked after exchange and also probably pay more rent to stay where you are...not to mention the time and stress to pursue it.

its all up front costs that some people dont have. again, it makes a mockery of the legal system that even if you are right, you cannot afford to enforce it.

I don't think that anyone is saying that it is ok if there is a problem because you can sue, but at least you can sue.
If the other side pull out or cause a delay a few days before completion, at least if you have already exchanged then you have the option of sueing them. If you were planning on exchanging and completing on the same day (as the OP is suggesting) then there wouldn't even be that option. But they'd still have to cancel removals, etc, at their own cost.

I would like to think that it would be such a clear cut case that the legal fees would (a) be minimal and (b) be almost guaranteed to be paid by the other side.
In fact, I'd be surprised if it even got to court as both sides have the contract that was signed and agreed with. I would have thought the other side would agree to pay the expenses presicely to avoid the legal fees. Unless, of course, someone is claiming unreasonable out of pocket expenses - e.g. they found it necessary to stay at The Ritz for a fortnight.