Move from hell, purchasers failed to complete HELP!

moneyistooshorttomention

Jhoney wrote: »

Whatever the penalty at this point, this individual (buyer 1) appears to have the potential to pay for the breach via house or employment (perhaps even pride/reputation?). So in that regard, the OP and his buyer are in a better situation than most would be in these circumstances, for full restitution.

It will resolve itself judiciously i'm sure, but the stress and disappointment of the last few days... that is priceless and bordering on unforgiveable - how does he justify/deserve a role in society such as his when there's a lack of basics like empathy, consideration of the impact your decisions have on others etc?

There will be no end of excuses, but no falling from grace or on his sword I wager. He'll pay up as it's in his own interest to do so!

The phrase is "enlightened self-interest", ie its in Duffhead's own best interests to (if belatedly) get on and "do the right thing" and make appropriate restitution to OP one way and another. Boy...does he ever owe OP and the others in this chain an apology big-time (as well as financial restitution) and if he wants to protect his reputation it would be as well for him to start figuring out how best to make restitution. The start of which being not to make people drag him through Courts to get the money he owes them.

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_self-interest

There's certainly at least one book on this, as I read it many years back and thought it made a huge amount of sense.

moneyistooshorttomention

Running_On_Empty wrote: »

Yes, name and shame them.
You are only reporting facts not speculation, nor gossip.

The temptation is certainly there to name them.

Personally, I would think its a more workeable strategy for OP to contact Duffhead personally (as soon as he is safely in possession of his new house) and tell him words to the effect of "There are 2 ways we can play this:

- You pay up what you owe me promptly and do the right thing by other people in the chain as well. Do this promptly and without any of us having to go to Court to make you do so. IF you do, then we'll let you off the hook.

- If you don't and decide to play silly beggers and make us all go through Court to get you to pay up then your reputation gets it...

I would think its more effective to hold the fear of exposure over this mans head as a way of getting him to pay up promptly, rather than actually naming him right now. If you name him right now then you've "fired your gun" and have no ammunition left to get him to pay up without putting you all through having to take him to Court.

"Keep your powder dry" and ready in case of need would be my estimate of the best way to deal with this man.

At a very pragmatic level, naming him now might have consequences for his income (ie him getting sacked from this organisation for having "brought it into disrepute") and, if his income gets hit, then his ability to pay up might be hit with it. Does this sound like voice of experience time here? <wink>. Well...it works.

botchjob

Running_On_Empty wrote: »

Yes, name and shame them.
You are only reporting facts not speculation, nor gossip.

There's a right to privacy. I wouldn't name them for the sole benefit of Internet busybodies if I were you...

ViolaLass

Megamonty wrote: »

Because all the costs pass down, I have explained to our purchasers that we don't intend to pull any stunts on them financially. They are good people like us with broken dreams and buckets of stress that have been poured on them for no reason. We have said despite our vendor needing paying up front, we will wait until they get paid out for the top three lots of cost in the chain as to avoid any further financial pressure and distress for them.

I understand it's been stressful but 'broken dreams'? You'll still get the new house, life will carry on. Yes, this is a complete pain but let's not overdramatise what has happened or its effects on those involved.

Better_Days

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

The temptation is certainly there to name them.

Personally, I would think its a more workeable strategy for OP to contact Duffhead personally (as soon as he is safely in possession of his new house) and tell him words to the effect of "There are 2 ways we can play this:

- You pay up what you owe me promptly and do the right thing by other people in the chain as well. Do this promptly and without any of us having to go to Court to make you do so. IF you do, then we'll let you off the hook.

- If you don't and decide to play silly beggers and make us all go through Court to get you to pay up then your reputation gets it...

I would think its more effective to hold the fear of exposure over this mans head as a way of getting him to pay up promptly, rather than actually naming him right now. If you name him right now then you've "fired your gun" and have no ammunition left to get him to pay up without putting you all through having to take him to Court.

"Keep your powder dry" and ready in case of need would be my estimate of the best way to deal with this man.

At a very pragmatic level, naming him now might have consequences for his income (ie him getting sacked from this organisation for having "brought it into disrepute") and, if his income gets hit, then his ability to pay up might be hit with it. Does this sound like voice of experience time here? <wink>. Well...it works.

OP, be guided by your solicitor. Last thing you want is to be accused of is blackmail.

Also bear in mind some of the 'rich and famous' dont give a flying anything what the public think of them.

It's a horrible and stressful situation, I do feel for you. Hope things go smoothly today.

moneyistooshorttomention

Hardly appropriate to call it "blackmail".:eek:

OP is going to get this money out of this man anyway, because this man owes it to him anyway. So Duffhead can either put the pair of them (ie both himself and OP) through loads of hassle for what could be some months OR pay up now and neither of them gets that hassle. It makes logical sense for both of them for things to be that way and save having to go through the courts.

DaftyDuck

No, it could very easily be considered blackmail. There's absolutely no reason or advantage to the OP contacting him personally, and it would be stupid to do so.

Equally, much as you might like to name him, or hint at who he is, wiser council might suggest to not do that either.

Follow the due process of the law through your current solicitor, or appoint one more experienced if necessary.

Certainly, if you did as Money suggested above, it would not work to your advantage, and might very well result in Mr Plod knocking on your door for a lengthy chat.

Lets all hope for completion first, then deal with the costs through proper, legal, channels.

Dan-Dan

sinizterguy wrote: »

That sounds correct.

You pay and you sue down the chain.

After all, they did end up with more costs and hassle than agreed.

You misunderstand me , it cant be right , that the other guy wont complete until he has received costs , the costs will surely be sued for , after everyones completed , or no one will be going anywhere

Dan-Dan

sinizterguy wrote: »

That sounds correct.

You pay and you sue down the chain.

After all, they did end up with more costs and hassle than agreed.

Yes , like i said , complete THEN sue

Dan-Dan

silvercar wrote: »

It can't be right because he is contractually obliged to complete on the contract. Any claim for money due to the delay is separate to the contract.

Aside from that, any claim from him to you will become part of your claim to your buyer, so it is unreasonable to expect you to produce the money out of thin air when it will be the buyers at the other end of the chain who will have to come up with the funds.

Thank you silvercar , someone else who gets it!