purchase of property fell through - am i liable for costs

stevo1809

TBagpuss wrote: »

You don't have any evidence that he developer knew that the bond was invalid at the time they put the house up for sale or when they agreed the sale with you, so you have no reason to think that there was any misrepresentation.

They now know that NI Water does not consider the bond to be valid, so they now know that there is a dispute over the validity of the bond which will have to be resolved.

Unless you have evidence that the developer knew before advertising the house that the existing bond was invalid (and bear in mind, you currently have NI Water saying it isn't, and the developer saying it is, so you don;t have proof it is invalid, you have have proof that there is a dispute over its validity) then there is no evidence of wrongdoing by the developer.

It's frustrating for you and for your buyers but unfortunately you will have to pay your costs and you are not going to be able to claim this back from anyone else.

The developers solicitor was told on several occasions by my solicitor and I also forwarded a copy of NIwaters correspondence to him. He point blank refused to enter into a new agreement with NIwater stating they where wrong. If he had entered into a new agreement I would have been able to proceed with the purchase, the fact they refused to do so meant Tesco bank would not release the funds for me to buy the property hence everything falling down. So he knew long before this all fell through that that the bond was not valid with NIwater.

Typhoon2000

Just playing devils advocate ( as it's Halloween)... May be the developers solicitors are right and the bond is indeed valid by law, and it is infact NIwater who are wrong. And NIwater providing the wrong information is what cause your bank not to release funds.

stator

It sounds like both parties found out about it after the sale was agreed and the solicitors charges started running.
Sorry but I don't think you have a case.

stevo1809

stator wrote: »

It sounds like both parties found out about it after the sale was agreed and the solicitors charges started running.
Sorry but I don't think you have a case.

Find it extremely hard to believe that the developer/solicitor didn't know they would need to enter into a new agreement given that the only one they have is in the previous land owner name who is bust and no longer in business.

Also to the point above, NIwater have confirmed in writing that there is an agreement in place but because the name on the agreement is of a developer that is no longer in business it is not valid. They have stated they will not stand over any agreement unless it is entered into by the new developer which to me makes sense. I just struggle to believe that a development company of this size would think otherwise.

Thrugelmir

stevo1809 wrote: »

Find it extremely hard to believe that the developer/solicitor didn't know they would need to enter into a new agreement given that the only one they have is in the previous land owner name who is bust and no longer in business.

What you think is pure supposition. Proving it in a court of law is far more difficult.

stevo1809

Thrugelmir wrote: »

What you think is pure supposition. Proving it in a court of law is far more difficult.

So your telling me a developer selling newly built properties in their development doesn't need to make sure they have valid bonds in place to do so? You can just buy land, build houses and sell them off as you please to whoever?