Would you take legal action against your house's previous owners?

JustAnotherSaver

We've got quite serious issues regards damp. There's a considerable amount of water under our floorboards & there's dark lines showing where the water has (consistently?) risen to that under the boards is 5/9ths high. Our neighbour tells us that in bad weather, their property gets wet flooring in the living room & they said that ours did as well. There is also apparently a beck running through our houses, although we've found no map detailing this.

We only have their word regarding the water situation. All we know for sure is the water level underneath is 4.5" when we looked (5" today under bad weather). This is causing our damp issue. A sump pump has been fitted which we weren't aware of. It works, but only when you tap the float with a stick (doesn't have to be a stick, you could dive in there & kick it i guess ). Also the distinct dark marking on the wall suggests it got 5 courses high on a 9 course wall quite regular. Perhaps it did get higher, just not so often & this has had time to dry out. I don't know.

The neighbours said our previous owners had recently decorated within the past 6 months. They found this funny because we immediately started stripping paper. So maybe new wallpaper on to mask the damp? Maybe just a coincidence? Who knows.

The sellers seemed nice enough, but then i guess they had to be.


So on the back of advice, we got in touch with our solicitor. Asked if anything should've picked this up as we can't find it in our paperwork. If we'd paid extra would it have picked it up etc. (structural vs homebuyers).

Solicitor said that it seems our seller may have mislead us and we may have a case for a claim against them.

He directed us towards paperwork the seller had filled out which asked if the property had ever flooded. The seller ticked no.

Personally i don't see how we might have a claim, but the solicitor will know better than us.

If the previous owner hadn't claimed themselves, on their insurance or whatever, against flooding, then there's no way we could ever prove it had flooded, surely?

For a repair we're looking at quite a few £1000.

The wife is concerned that after costs, we may not get back enough to warrant the hassle.

Would you pursue a claim vs your previous owners or would you just knock it on the head?

phill99

Ask your solicitor to explain 'caveat emptor' to you.

It's your duty to satisfy yourself about the condition of the house you are buying. If you opted not to have a structural survey (which would have cost more, but would have been more thorough) then you live with the consequences.

If the vendors have deliberately lied, then they may have a question to answer. However, don't hold your breath.

Realistically, up your chances are practically zero.

kiddy_guy

If your neighbour is saying that your property has flooded previously can he confirm the previous owners told him this?

If so you've got a case.

JustAnotherSaver

Don't you worry - we're not getting our hopes up over this. We don't expect to go anywhere other than brick wall.

It's lovely to look back on things & say if we'd have done it differently. If we could do that then i'd have looked at that big Euro lottery rollover & picked the correct numbers & i wouldn't be asking questions about a semi as i'd be having my own mansion built. Shame we can't do that though.

It is our duty, you're right, and we were satisfied. Seller said no flood & we had no reason to doubt that. We had a rough knowledge of the area & didn't remember it ever flooding. I emphasise rough though - we knew of it.

It's only on MSE that we've been met with the "should always opt for structural" viewpoint.
I do wonder how magical this structural survey would be though. I put it to our IFA who suggested we would be no further forward had we paid the extra.

* Would a structural survey have taken off all the wallpaper to detect just how bad the damp was (worse than reported on HB)?
* Would a structural have removed the wallpaper in the bedroom to see the big water stain behind it that wasn't visible with the paper on (new paper apparently)? Turns out this leaky roof had been repaired anyway.
* Would a structural have lifted the carpet to detect the water level under the boards?
* And then seen the sump pump which appears to 1) not be wired properly & 2) not working properly?
* Would a structural have located the mystical map that shows this apparent beck that is spoken of yet when you go back 100 years in maps, nothing is shown?

I do wonder. I put it to our IFA like i say, who said we'd be no further forward had we paid the extra.

JustAnotherSaver

kiddy_guy wrote: »

If your neighbour is saying that your property has flooded previously can he confirm the previous owners told him this?

If so you've got a case.

Without asking them, we don't know. We'd have to see if it went down that road.

Though with them having been neighbours for the past 10 years, i would guess (& it's only a guess mind) that they wouldn't want to do over their neighbours, especially as they spoke about how nice they were.

eddddy

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

...
Solicitor said that it seems our seller may have mislead us and we may have a case for a claim against them.

He directed us towards paperwork the seller had filled out which asked if the property had ever flooded. The seller ticked no.

Personally i don't see how we might have a claim, but the solicitor will know better than us.
...

Hi Justanothersaver

It sounds like your saying the seller answered "No" to question 7.1 on the TA6 Property Information Form:

Has any part of the property (whether buildings or surrounding garden or land) ever been flooded? If yes, please state when the flooding occurred and identify the parts that were flooded.

Or if it was the older version of the form:

Are you aware of any flooding at your property since you have owned it or before?

In legal terms, you relied on this information. (i.e. you might not have bought the property, if they answered "yes")

If you believe the seller intentionally misled you, you can pursue them for damages. The amount of damages might be the cost of repairing any flood damage, plus the cost of remedying the problem (e.g. digging drainage channels etc.), plus any reduction in the properties value resulting from the flood history.

If it went as far as court, it would be decided "on the balance of probabilities". (i.e. The judge would decide if it is it more likely that the seller knew there had been flooding, or it is more likely he/she didn't know?)

So you would need to collect witness statements from neighbours etc., to demonstrate that the previous owners probably knew there had been floods.

If you want to pursue this, the first step is to trace the seller, and perhaps then send a formal letter asking why they answered "no" to question 7.1 on the form.

(In fact, some lawyers suggest that telling lies on a Property Information Form in order to get a better price for you house is "fraud by dishonestly making a false representation" or "fraud by dishonestly failing to disclose information". These are criminal offences, so you would need to get the police involved. And these would need to be proved 'beyond reasonable doubt' in court.)

partialycloudy

A Homebuyers report would have picked up the damp by using an instrument that reads dampness/wetness of the walls....no need to remove the wallpaper.
We had a homebuyers report on a house we were buying and it picked up major damp on one of the bay windows and picked up the cause of it. We were going to amend our offer but our buyer pulled out so we lost the house anyway.

JustAnotherSaver

partialycloudy wrote: »

A Homebuyers report would have picked up the damp by using an instrument that reads dampness/wetness of the walls....no need to remove the wallpaper.
We had a homebuyers report on a house we were buying and it picked up major damp on one of the bay windows and picked up the cause of it. We were going to amend our offer but our buyer pulled out so we lost the house anyway.

I know - and our homebuyers report did pick up damp. Just not to the degree that exists as they'd placed things over some of the walls (book cases etc).


My point is that during questioning on MSE, we are being told by more than one member here that we should've paid extra & gone for a structural survey instead as it would've picked up on absolutely EVERYTHING possible. The damp & the degree of damp that exists, ignoring nothing. The water under the floorboards. The wet patch behind the wallpaper in the bedroom that wasn't visible until the wallpaper came off etc etc etc - EVERYTHING.

Which is why i wondered how magical this structural survey really was.

poppysarah

Always speak to the neighbours before you buy a house. They might not tell you anything useful but you never know they might spill the beans.

GwylimT

Generally it is always a good idea to speak to neighbours before buying if possible, if you had a survey it would have identified the damp issue, they don't need to remove anything they can simply measure moisture levels, this would identify the source of the damp and then you could have either asked sellers to rectify, or lower your offer to reflect the cost of rectifying damp. A survey would have then also likely caused the pump to be found when the cost of repair to the damp problem was investigated.

A survey is much more thorough than a home buyers, they can also investigate specific areas and the person carrying them out is generally more knowledgeable. When my wife and I bought our last house it identified damp under the living room and dining room floor, the floor covering was lino, so a fairly impermeable membrane, no brook for us, but once we found out that below the floorboards we just had soil we investigated further to ensure there weren't any springs etc running close by. We had it sealed when we moved in and it was a fairly easy job to do, bit messy though.

I_have_spoken

A sump pump has been fitted which we weren't aware of. It works, but only when you tap the float with a stick

TBH, I'd expect the seller to say 'no' it's never flooded because when we lived there the sump-pump kept the ground-water in check. Has it broken since we sold..oh, dear!