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!
Case Or No Case
Comments
-
I'm not sure a contract has to exist before you can claim compensation. Arguably if you had gone ahead knowing that there were tennants in situ then you would be stopped from claiming compensation as you acquiesced and estoppel might apply.
The problem seems to me to be that she withdrew from the sale as is her right regardless of the situation. The question then becomes a hypothetical one of would you have gone ahead with the survey had you known the truth.
I fancy that if I was in your situation I would pursue a claim, largely on the basis that there wouldn't be much to lose (not involving solicitors mind) provided I could prove the date the SIPF was received, the date the surveyors were instructed, AND that the seller had lied. That last could be the most difficult.0 -
matto - I entirely take your point. Perhaps then I should change my stance and we should instead all encourage OP in order to see just what comes out of a small claims action. It could be a learning curve for all of us and something in the future to hold over the heads of truth-fudging sellers, and haven't we all at some time been caught on the back foot by them?! Hmmm .. interesting.0
-
rule of estoppel - pru - tell us more about this please ? - sounds interesting !0
-
If you could, that would be great. Thanks in advance.
I have already decided to go through the small claims court, depending on the reply I receive.
found out.. it was the seller who said the house had a garage. it later turns out that in fact the garage was "borrowed" for many years from next-door. when the solicitor found out the buyer confronted the sellers who later admitted it, but said they could continue using the garage! the buyer claimed there solicitors costs. they may have lost had it gone to court but luckily the seller thought not.0 -
Thanks for the info. Also thanks to all for their advise.david29dpo wrote: »found out.. it was the seller who said the house had a garage. it later turns out that in fact the garage was "borrowed" for many years from next-door. when the solicitor found out the buyer confronted the sellers who later admitted it, but said they could continue using the garage! the buyer claimed there solicitors costs. they may have lost had it gone to court but luckily the seller thought not.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards