Barclays no Angels

TrickyDicky101

You have yet to confirm whether you actually commissioned a report directly from the surveyor or whether you simply relied on the valuation report performed for Barclays (albeit paid for by you).

Can you confirm this point without mentioning 'independent' again please?

CB18

Thanks for all your comments,yes I do have a very in depth knowledge of the law regarding this and I wish I didn't but when you are losing your home when actually the bank made the mistake it focuses your mind.

CB18

It stated that the property has serious structural problems.

Thrugelmir

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

You have yet to confirm whether you actually commissioned a report directly from the surveyor or whether you simply relied on the valuation report performed for Barclays (albeit paid for by you).

Can you confirm this point without mentioning 'independent' again please?

Given the avoidance in answering in a direct fashion seems not.

CB18

The survey was commissioned through the Woolwich as previously stated.

charliewocka

CB18 wrote: »

It stated that the property has serious structural problems.

If the report stated that there were serious structural problems, surely the onus is on YOU to proceed with purchase? By continuing you are saying that you are happy with the issues that have been identified?


Have you claimed on your buildings insurance?

CB18

If you read through the replies I never received the page stating there were structural problems the bank kept that to themselves.

Let_Us_See

I am sorry you find yourself in this position and I accept you have a greater in-depth knowledge of your particular case, but from a mortgage point of view, the only mistake Woolwich/Barclays possibly made was lending on a property which did not provide adequate long-term collateral. The fact the property had, or later developed subsidence, is neither here nor there, and thousands of property suffering from either previous or existing subsidence are mortgaged each year.

You still have not confirmed whether you requested a valuation for mortgage purposes or a Homebuyers Report? If the latter, than you should be able to make a claim against the surveyor, who will be covered by their Professional Insurance Indemnity. If a basic valuation, then it is not so clear cut, and although you would hope the lender would bring to the purchaser's attention, I am not sure if they are legally bound to do so.

Basically, it appears the lender to an extent screwed up internally during processing, and an underwriter either failed to notice or deemed the valuation was still acceptable for lending purposes, and offered you a mortgage.

In an ideal world none of the above would have happened, but I believe both you and the lender share culpability.

maninthestreet

Why would the bank deliberately withhold information in the survey fron a prospective buyer that showed the property had serious structural defects? What would they have to gain by doing so?

CB18

Basically, it appears the lender to an extent screwed up internally during processing, and an underwriter either failed to notice or deemed the valuation was still acceptable for lending purposes, and offered you a mortgage.

This statement is exactly what happened according to Barclays internal emails.