Seller has lied on Law Societies Property Information Form (TA6)

Surrey_EA

martinsurrey wrote: »

you have 5 years to START the works (in most cases, which are detailed on the permission), an unlimited time to finish.

I think that's changed to 3 years now.

getmore4less

Makes no sense as written.

I think what the OP was trying to say.

House 1 the one they want to buy

House 2 the one next door has planning(2001 foundations built) for an extention that will knock £100k off house 1.


What has happend to these foundations did no one see them in 2006 or now?


Why are house 1 in dispute with house 2 if the planning foundations were in place it should be with the people that sold to them not the people that have a legitimate set of foundations.


Did they not check what planning was on the properties around and not notice there were bit missing.

Gigervamp

getmore4less wrote: »

Makes no sense as written.

I think what the OP was trying to say.

House 1 the one they want to buy

House 2 the one next door has planning(2001 foundations built) for an extention that will knock £100k off house 1.


What has happend to these foundations did no one see them in 2006 or now?


Why are house 1 in dispute with house 2 if the planning foundations were in place it should be with the people that sold to them not the people that have a ligitimate set of foundations.

I thought it was the other way round.

OP, you're going to have to clarify the situation, because as you can see, everyone is confused.

libbyliberty

Sorry I'll try to explain. The property we are looking to buy was built in 2006. In 2001 planning permission was given to the house next door for an annexe to be built, when this permission was given the house we are buying didn't exist. The owner of the house next door laid the foundations of the annex but never anymore which meant that the planning permission cannot expire as the work has started. We are not aware as to why they haven't done anymore work. The house we are buying when built in 2006 must have been given planning permission without the planner realising that foundations existed for an annexe as the annexe finishes only 5ft from the garden fence and the window on the 2nd storey looks straight into the windows of our house. The reason for the £100k reduction in value is mainly due to lack of privacy and loss of light, the house price is over £1m but with this extension being so close it will lose it's stand alone detached look. (I live close to London hence the high values). The current owner purchased the property in 2011 and must have also brought the property also not realising about the annexe build as she has been fighting for the past three years to stop the build with solicitors letters etc - her main angle was the loss of value to her house. None of this has been declared to us on the TA6, no mention of a dispute with the neighbour or a declaration of known planned building. Thank you all for you answers hopefully this might help clarify.

martinsurrey

Surrey_EA wrote: »

I think that's changed to 3 years now.

you are of course right.

old habits...

nakiwala123

I think you might not have a case againast the vendors. The vendor would only need to disclose disputes if they were logged with the council in an official complaint.

pinkteapot

So, in short:

Property next door to the house you're buying has permission to build an extension (annexe) which will be very close to your boundary and overlook your house. If/when built, this will devalue the house you're buying by £100k (approx 10%).

Your vendor has been in a long-running dispute with next door to try and prevent the build going ahead.

Vendor failed to disclose the dispute on the PIF. In addition, the neighbour with planning permission made the EA aware and the EA didn't tell you. These points will be the crux of whether you can recover any costs.

Firstly, as others have said, I'd consider this a VERY lucky escape as you haven't exchanged yet. You can either negotiate the price down, or pull out. Even if you lose your £7k, that's better than losing £100k on the value of your home!

Focus first on whether you want this house with this hanging over it. Now you're aware of the dispute, you'll have to disclose it if you want to sell in the future.

On this value of house, I don't think your decision on whether to proceed with the purchase should hang on whether you can recover any of your costs or not. It should come down to whether you want the house, knowing what you now know. Then, to how much you're now prepared to pay (revised price) and whether the vendor will agree.

I know you can sue your vendor over lies on the PIF post-completion, but I'm not sure if you can pre-exchange?

Others mentioned the regulation of EAs above, which was tightened up in 2011, so you may have a case if you can prove when the EA was told to tell you about the situation.

thesaint

pinkteapot wrote: »

Vendor instructed their EA to make you aware of this, and EA failed to do so.

No, the neighbour made the Estate Agent aware of this.

libbyliberty

The vendor hasn't told us anything about any of this, the reason we found out about the planning is that the next door neighbour contacted us directly via our planning application. The next door neighbour wrote to the vendor and to the selling estate agents back in Feb and May asking them to make us aware of the planning permission as he didn't want another dispute with a change of owner. He has given us copies of the letters and the letter to the estate agents says further to our telephone conversation........
Had we known about the build we would never have offered what we have offered and the house would have been over priced. If they refuse to reduce the price we will have no choice but to walk away. Can we not go after the vendor for lying on her TA6 form, after all had she not lied when it was completed back in April we would never had progressed with the sale and incurred all of these costs.

Andypandyboy

Does the neighbour actually intend to build the annexe?

If not, and he would put that in writing then you may feel like continuing with the sale.

Without that assurance I would pull out now, and then try to recover my costs.