House Deposit - Section 75a Claim

MPH80

I'm not sure why the failure of a 3rd party to the relationship would result in a breach of section 75.

I'm also not sure that there is a legitimate D-C-S relationship. If the auction house was paid rather than the home owner, where the contract was to pass on the money to the owner, then it strikes me the auction house is the supplier - so even if the owner of the property had backtracked there'd be no protection.

derps

Take care, chaps - the OP is talking about s.75A not s.75. The financial thresholds are different and not £100- £30,000 like s.75.

That said, s.75A is still about the creditor being accountable for wrongdoing by the supplier, which isn't what's at hand. You appear to have suffered a loss by relying on incorrect mortgage advice according to your story. You might have a claim for this via various legal routes which you'd ideally get expert advice on but you might also want to consider a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service since that would be probably be cheaper and easier.

eddddy

milktwosugars wrote: »

...
The notice expired yesterday and I have been informed the vendor has retained the £5,200 deposit paid on my MBNA card.
...

I kind of hate to say this... but you need to check the auction t&cs. The £5200 deposit may only be the start.

You may well be responsible for all the vendors consequential losses. e.g. if the vendor puts the property back in the next auction, and it sells for £20k less, it's likely you will have to make up the £20k, plus re-auction fees, aborted legal fees, loss of interest etc.

The nightmare scenario would be that as a result of his/her 'successful' sale at auction, the vendor exchanged contracts to buy another property - with a whole chain above it. And the whole chain failed to complete, because you didn't complete. You would now be responsible for a whole chain's consequential losses.

The best case scenario is obviously that it sells for more at the next auction. Then your losses may be capped at £5200.

MPH80

derps wrote: »

Take care, chaps - the OP is talking about s.75A not s.75. The financial thresholds are different and not £100- £30,000 like s.75.

That said, s.75A is still about the creditor being accountable for wrongdoing by the supplier, which isn't what's at hand. You appear to have suffered a loss by relying on incorrect mortgage advice according to your story. You might have a claim for this via various legal routes which you'd ideally get expert advice on but you might also want to consider a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service since that would be probably be cheaper and easier.

Except that 75a is no good for him as the credit supplied for section 75a has to be exclusively for a particular purpose. It's designed for situations like a sofa loan or a car loan.

Using your general-purpose credit card can only ever invoke section 75.

jonesMUFCforever

Well the house was there to be purchased - so there is absolutely no way any kind of claim on the credit card can be entertained.

pvt

eddddy wrote: »

I kind of hate to say this... but you need to check the auction t&cs. The £5200 deposit may only be the start.

You may well be responsible for all the vendors consequential losses. e.g. if the vendor puts the property back in the next auction, and it sells for £20k less, it's likely you will have to make up the £20k, plus re-auction fees, aborted legal fees, loss of interest etc.

The nightmare scenario would be that as a result of his/her 'successful' sale at auction, the vendor exchanged contracts to buy another property - with a whole chain above it. And the whole chain failed to complete, because you didn't complete. You would now be responsible for a whole chain's consequential losses.

The best case scenario is obviously that it sells for more at the next auction. Then your losses may be capped at £5200.

It's a while since I did any conveyancing, but I've never come across a contract, house purchase or otherwise, that covered liquidated damages of those who are not party to the contract.

eddddy

pvt wrote: »

It's a while since I did any conveyancing, but I've never come across a contract, house purchase or otherwise, that covered liquidated damages of those who are not party to the contract.

Everyone in the chain sues the person below them. It's like a snowball effect - the "total loss" amount gets bigger and bigger as it progresses down the chain until it lands in the OP's lap.


A small simple example to illustrate:

OP fails to complete purchase from Mr A... Mr A's consequential losses are £10k

As a result Mr A is unable to complete purchase from Mr B... Mr B's consequential losses are £12k

As a result Mr B is unable to complete purchase from Mr C... Mr C's consequential losses are £8k

So...

Mr C sues Mr B for his £8k loss

So Mr B's total losses are now £8k + £12k = £20k
So Mr B sues Mr A for £20k

So Mr A's total losses are now £20k + £10k = 30k
So Mr A sues OP for £30k

OP ends up £30k out of pocket.

sandy_smith_2

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

Well the house was there to be purchased - so there is absolutely no way any kind of claim on the credit card can be entertained.

Probably not the answer the OP was looking for but this is how I see it too.

bris

pvt wrote: »

It's a while since I did any conveyancing, but I've never come across a contract, house purchase or otherwise, that covered liquidated damages of those who are not party to the contract.

The auction house can and will sue for loses if the price is not covered at next auction, they have a duty to their client.


Contracts are exchanged on the drop of a hammer, if you did conveyancing in the past you should know this.