Chain broken down after exchange

Jaff.

It's not worth the hassle really. Ill speak to my solicitor to see exactly what happens now but as long as I get all my money back then I'm happy.

The compensation thing was just a curiosity after speaking to a few people who mentioned it and I never really believed the figured being banded about. (My solicitor even had me expecting 10% of the purchase price for a few weeks before popping that balloon by saying she was mistaken) so there's a lot of questions with regards to what exactly you're entitled to when this happens.

Had the word cancer not been mentioned in here this thread would have gone another way completely and I bet there'd be a lot more people encouraging me to persue it. Plus there's always the chance that its all made up...

It Angers me that there is such little punishment for doing this to people.

Cissi

Jaff. wrote: »

It Angers me that there is such little punishment for doing this to people.

What, dying? Yes, appalling really, someone should put a stop to it.

Jaff.

Cissi wrote: »

What, dying? Yes, appalling really, someone should put a stop to it.

Lol I knew someone with a god complex would play that card! And if she's not actually dying?

What if it was a different excuse altogether? I'm not talking specifically about my situation, lets hope you don't have this happen to you and you get messed about for months only for the offending party to get away with it with minimal punishment

rrtt

Jaff. wrote: »

No and as Ive said many times I have masses of sympathy for the couple and her family, despite the stress I've been put through. But I'm still the bad guy when it's on the Internet because I'm also trying to look after my own family.

The solicitor I imagine will blame me for not asking if I didn't understand something so best chalk that one up to experience

Seriously Jaff, whilst sympathetic to you because of the awful situation you found/find yourself in, if your priority is 100% this

"I have my own family to look out for and that's what I'm doing, regardless of other people's issues"

as you said in an earlier post, then you should be cutting your losses and moving on instead of subjecting yourself and your family to further stress by gnawing away at the compensation issue and generally feeling miserable at what's happened (including the stress of getting into an argument on an internet forum). Stress causes illness - fact. You need to remember that there are some things more valuable than money, as the problems facing the dying lady and her family + other posters with very serious health issues have highlighted all too sadly here. The best way you can look out for your family is to treasure their and your health.

Sorry, don't mean to preach if it comes across like that, but as someone plagued by health problems for most of my adult life, I don't think most healthy people appreciate how rich they actually are.

Jaff.

I understand what your saying of course, but your still off the mark by assuming I'd want to go to court to get compensation... That is indeed stress I do not want. If I was entitled to compensation then I imagine it would be through the same way as I'm getting my costs back I.e an agreement between two parties.

As for stressing out over "arguing" on here, nothing said on here by people who only read what they want to read has stressed me out at all, it's only the Internet after all. So do not worry about my health

Thank you for your input though, I hope you're not plagued with any more health issues

John_Pierpoint

Unfortunately the power system is stacked against the bottom of the chain people with little capital - had you defaulted on the contract your seller would be kept your deposit and, claimed his losses if forced to sell the house at a lower price some some time down the line. I think your solicitor had mentally got the situation the other way round and was thinking of you as a seller.

For what it is worth, 20 years ago I was involved in a similar situation.
However I was at the top of a chain, selling a £300,000 detached house as an executor.
For those with long memories, this was a time when the housing market was just starting to come out of a nasty slump and some buyers were 6 - 12 months behind the curve.
Any way I had to go to sealed bids, and a couple with a very valid educational need to move "won".
Some weeks later the chain fell apart, supposedly because one of the directors of the bank of mum and dad, part financing the first time buyer at the foot of the chain, had been diagnosed with cancer.
In the intervening weeks most of the other bidders had shaken hands to buy with someone else - but one couple were still interested so I told them that as a trustee I was obliged to accept the best realistic offer.

I don't think they were listening as they promptly started trying to beat down the price.

I got back in touch with the original buyers and we hatched up the following deal:
"You exchange now for 5% deposit and I then allow you 4 months for completion - if you fail to complete I simply keep the 5% and nobody has any other obligations to each other".
[It cost a few hundred pounds getting my solicitor to teach his clerk how to change the paperwork to meet my instructions]

In the event the buyers managed to sort out their bit of the chain and the completion went ahead after 6 weeks.

I think there are two messages here:

The Chinese invented paper money and the Italians invented double entry book keeping and compound interest in order to free commercial transactions from the problems of delays and problems of having to exchange large amounts of metal money.

There are no problems only opportunities.

geoffky

newsgroup_monkey wrote: »

Sorry, how in any way is a giving birth compensation claim relevant?
.

By showing the op how unfair life is and sometimes you just have to get on with it and move on..
Simple when it is spelt out for you..:cool:

Thrugelmir

HarryBarry wrote: »

If they were to breach it and it got as far as a judge, I think he would see the cancer story as a good reason why there was a delay (so they can arrange for somewhere to live), but possibly wouldn't see it as a reason for them to flatly refuse to move or a delay for months (considering they have the option to rent and it only takes a few weeks to organise).

Having recently seen a couple of colleagues undergo treatment of differing kinds with relation to the removal of cancerous cells. Then months not weeks is the case.

HarryBarry

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Having recently seen a couple of colleagues undergo treatment of differing kinds with relation to the removal of cancerous cells. Then months not weeks is the case.

No I meant the couple without cancer had a genuine reason why they had to breach the contract (the person they are buying from has cancer so blocked them from moving into the house). So it's a genuine reason for delay, but its not a reason to completely stop the OP from going ahead with the purchase - it just means they need to make other arrangements (rent or get a new house).

I have no idea of what the situation is between elderly couple and cancer couple. They might have agreed not go buy the house or might have agreed to wait. But either way, just because they have an agreement it didnt mean the contract between OP and elderly couple was allowed to be breached - but they didnt have much choice initially as they had nowhere to go, so a judge might say a delay of a few weeks was reasonable but to delay for months is not.

Flugelhorn

I am curious as to why couple 3 went ahead with the exchange while they were still waiting for the results of many hospital tests at an appointment - you might think they had understandably more important things on their minds and it would have been better for all in the long run if they had not exxhanged at all ....