home buying nightmare! repairs estimated at £60000!!!

homebuyer1

We have recently bought a house which we discovered had serious wet rot and possibly dry rot problems the day we moved in! Estimated repairs approx £60,000. The home buyers survey did not pick up any problems and on the seller's questionnaire the seller claimed to have no knowledge of any rot or any repairs done to the house. However when we got a damp specialist in to estimate the repairs he told us he could clearly see there has recently (last few months) been some very obvious repairs to the timbers affected by the rot. So clearly the previous owners knew about the issue and lied on the seller's questionnaire. The "repaired" area was concealed under a newish carpet and only found by luck when part of the floor gave way the day after moving in.

So what can we do now?
Are we going to be stuck with this huge bill and months of repairs (we haven't got the money and no where else to live)?
Will the previous owners/our insurance pay for any rot repairs?
Can we get the previous owners to pay for the cost of the repairs?
Can we give the house back and get our money back?

Devastated homebuyer.:(

steve2005

I think the first thing to do here would be contact your solicitor.
The second thing would be to contact the surveying company.

bris

If you just got a valuation survey then there is not a lot you can do.


You would need to prove the buyer lied, but if they have no expertise in the building trade how are you going to prove it.


The fault unfortunately lies with yourself, due diligence has to be top priority when making the biggest purchase of your life.


Insurers won't pay out, their insurance is no longer valid and you can't insure against an existing problem.

stator

bris wrote: »

If you just got a valuation survey then there is not a lot you can do.

It was a home buyer's report from the sound of it

You need a solicitor

artbaron

As above, contact your solicitor. A homebuyer's report doesn't normally deal with damp although if it was blatantly obvious then you may have a case. Also, if it can be proved the previous owners had work done on the damp problem and didn't mention it then you can sue them. Simple as that, but you'd need to show they knew about it.

jhs14

I'd have thought that if you can show that recent remedial work had been attempted, then that would show that the sellers knew about it, and therefore lied on the forms. I agree that you should speak to your solicitor - good luck.

NobodysChild

jhs14 wrote: »

I'd have thought that if you can show that recent remedial work had been attempted, then that would show that the sellers knew about it, and therefore lied on the forms. I agree that you should speak to your solicitor - good luck.

I agree with this post. I think that you will need a solicitor to deal with this. What an awful thing to happen to you. I hope you get it sorted.

Lord_Baltimore

Nightmare, and I think you may be stuck with it. £60k repair sounds like dry rot; probably all the joists, floorboards and through the mortar to goodness knows where. The ceiling(s) might be next.

It's going to be hard nailing anyone for this and more solicitors fees on top will be no fun. You can't just leave it though or it will get worse.

Don't get too down - there's always a solution.

Good luck

jhs14

bris wrote: »

You would need to prove the buyer lied, but if they have no expertise in the building trade how are you going to prove it.

But as this is a civil and not criminal matter, you don't have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, just on the balance of probabilities. In other words, is it more likely that the sellers knew about the problem or not. On the facts listed I think the OP would have a good case. There's no 'innocent until proven guilty' principle here.

AdrianC

What, exactly, did your HBR say in the relevant areas of the report?

bris

jhs14 wrote: »

But as this is a civil and not criminal matter, you don't have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, just on the balance of probabilities. In other words, is it more likely that the sellers knew about the problem or not. On the facts listed I think the OP would have a good case. There's no 'innocent until proven guilty' principle here.

I know how civil cases work, but this is why we employ professionals when buying houses.


Caveat Emptor is one of the most important factors when buying anything from a private party and ignorance is the sellers best defence.


The courts won't have much sympathy (legally speaking) for a buyer who has the ability to instruct a proper survey or do proper due diligence. It's no difference to any other private sale, the only thing that's different is the stakes.


Certainly it's more than worth a shot for the sums involved, but for me the legal fees may be better spent on the problem rather than the solicitors, I think the chances are slim.