Seller will not complete after exchange......

ReadingTim

I would take some advice from a specialist property lawyer (ie not a conveyancing solicitor), but be mindful that you might be unsuccessful in using legal means to force the decision you want with the budget you have; and therefore you may be faced with making a commercial decision to ensure the least worse outcome from this sorry sequence of events for you and your family.

m0bov

Have you raised a complaint with you Sol? Have you taken it to their senior partners? This would be quicker than going to a third party. What about the law society?

silvercar

macman wrote: »

I don't understand this. At exchange, the vendor committed irrevocably to sell you the property and complete on the agreed date. Neither illness nor even death void that contract, it must proceed. Your solicitor should be dealing with this as a breach of contract and insisting on completion at the earliest possible date and compensation for the delay.
What his illness is is none of your concern and entirely irrelevant to the legality of the sale.

Unless the vendor was not of sound mind at the point of exchange, in which case the vendor's solicitor should not have allowed the vendor in to a contract.

Th vendor's mental health at the point of completion is irrelevant.

Marktheshark

You can not work on fear, you must push ahead and if they are to back out you are better finding out as quickly as possible.
Otherwise this could wade on months at £500 a week and then they back out.

I would get on to your solicitor and ask them to get back to you within the hour with an action plan for what they intend to do, or you will find another solicitor.

macman

silvercar wrote: »

Unless the vendor was not of sound mind at the point of exchange, in which case the vendor's solicitor should not have allowed the vendor in to a contract.

Th vendor's mental health at the point of completion is irrelevant.

There is no evidence to suggest that the vendor was not competent to sign the contract and exchange, and the OP should not have to prove otherwise. It's up to the vendor to dispute this aspect if they wish-which would be long and expensive.