Seller lied on property questionaire - Electrical fire

AdrianC

sean1989 wrote: »

Considering the cu was now apparently replaced in 2005 (not that i still believe the supplier)

That consumer unit was not replaced in 2005. That consumer unit predates the 16th edition wiring regs, which came in in 1991. You would not have been able to buy that for at least a decade and a half before you alleged it was replaced. I think you are getting confused with the electricity meter, which is the boundary of your supplier's responsibility.

sean1989 wrote: »

Now were missing the bigger picture, ive raised a negligence complaint against the conveyancers as no survey was offered at any time and they conducted a standard strucutal survey without ua having a clue.

No survey was offered, yet who conducted a "standard structural" survey?

1. It's not down to anybody to offer you a survey.
2. The conveyancers don't do surveys. They might ask you if your survey's raised any issues, but that's their total involvement.
3. A "standard" survey is not a structural survey (the top level), but a "home buyer's report" (the middle level).
4. You only seem to have had the lender's valuation "survey" actually conducted (the bottom level, and not intended for you anyway).

Frankly, I give in. You are not hearing what you are being told, and are continuing to repeat the same old things - albeit with added drip-feed of pertinent information - even after it's been explained to you repeatedly by several posters.

Good luck. Please let us know what happens in the end.

libf

Did you have a survey? Did it say the electrics were okay? Your conveyancer has never even been in the house...

kellaree

davidmcn wrote: »

Never mind the black letter law, two things to consider before you sue anybody for anything:

1. Do you know where they are?
2. Do you know that they have enough cash to pay whatever you're claiming for?

Very good point, in the best case scenario:

You win this case, seller is told to pay up for the damages.... What are you going to do if they don't have the money? By this point, you'll have already had to repair the wiring in the house anyway and wasted time and money on legal fees as well.

sean1989_2

AdrianC wrote: »

No survey was offered, yet who conducted a "standard structural" survey?

1. It's not down to anybody to offer you a survey.
2. The conveyancers don't do surveys. They might ask you if your survey's raised any issues, but that's their total involvement.
3. A "standard" survey is not a structural survey (the top level), but a "home buyer's report" (the middle level).
4. You only seem to have had the lender's valuation "survey" actually conducted (the bottom level, and not intended for you anyway).

Frankly, I give in. You are not hearing what you are being told, and are continuing to repeat the same old things - albeit with added drip-feed of pertinent information - even after it's been explained to you repeatedly by several posters.

Good luck. Please let us know what happens in the end.

I have listened intently but people just keep saying its my fault because the survey wasn't done.

im sure that this can happen to many people in different aspects - Not just electrical etc.

even if i dont win anything - at least a lesson will be learnt for me and other FTB to research and look into things much more!

sean1989_2

kellaree wrote: »

Very good point, in the best case scenario:

You win this case, seller is told to pay up for the damages.... What are you going to do if they don't have the money? By this point, you'll have already had to repair the wiring in the house anyway and wasted time and money on legal fees as well.

This is very true - this makes me think not to instigate legal simply put, if they dont pay it costs more to enforce etc.

I think the result will be determined based on

1. what the conveyance service reply with
2. if the house insurance pay up

a previous post mentioned if the insurance pays up - take that and run

kellaree

sean1989 wrote: »

When speaking to them today they said they just did a "standard" survey.

Im beginning to think the countrywide have no idea what they are talking about...

am i missing something really obvious here?.... so we first saw our mortgage consultant and he said " they are using countrywide - do you want to as well, this was we can get the ball rolling and everything will be taken care of "

Yes we said - because as FTB we didnt want the hassle of looking around everywhere.

We signed the paperwork instructing them - the booklet we obtained never mentioned surveys nor did someone say "do you want a survey"

All that happened over the next few months is we got bombarded with paperwork and i distinctly remember seeing one that spoke about the structure.

Countrywide (today) confirmed that a structural survey was done and that was it... but as far as I was aware they were doing everything.... so if they just took it in their liberties to do a structural survey - i wonder in the 2k of fees if the survey was listed!

I think you've put too much responsibility on other people to ensure what needed to be done, was done. You were the one buying the house, yet you don't even seem to know what type of survey was done, and what you paid them £2k for. Which seems very high to me, I paid £600 when I was a FTB, for my legal fees.

A valuation survey would have been done by your mortgage provider and they might have offered a Home Buyer's for a couple of hundred pound more but I have never heard of a solicitor offering a survey. Why would they?

kellaree

sean1989 wrote: »

This is very true - this makes me think not to instigate legal simply put, if they dont pay it costs more to enforce etc.

I think the result will be determined based on

1. what the conveyance service reply with
2. if the house insurance pay up

a previous post mentioned if the insurance pays up - take that and run

I think this is the most sensible option, I can't see you getting anywhere with the conveyancers. Learn from this and move on! Good luck

AdrianC

sean1989 wrote: »

I have listened intently but people just keep saying its my fault because the survey wasn't done.

Not that the existence of the problem is your fault - just that you took no steps to determine any problems with the property before buying it.

im sure that this can happen to many people in different aspects - Not just electrical etc.

Yes, they can. Electrics are relatively minor, and you had all the clues there.

even if i dont win anything - at least a lesson will be learnt for me and other FTB to research and look into things much more!

Which would require people in your position to do basic research. If you'd done that, you'd have found that surveys are your responsibility entirely, and that they are very strongly recommended unless you really know what you're doing with a property. It's really not as if this is an area of life where there aren't already plenty of good resources to help the noob.

Rather more to the point, though, you seem intent on throwing good money after bad and misinterpreting everything you are told to be as favourable as possible to your self-dug hole. Good luck. You are going to need it.

Kellaree - I think the £2k is the legals. The OP doesn't seem to understand that they are separate.

sean1989_2

kellaree wrote: »

I think you've put too much responsibility on other people to ensure what needed to be done, was done. You were the one buying the house, yet you don't even seem to know what type of survey was done, and what you paid them £2k for. Which seems very high to me, I paid £600 when I was a FTB, for my legal fees.

A valuation survey would have been done by your mortgage provider and they might have offered a Home Buyer's for a couple of hundred pound more but I have never heard of a solicitor offering a survey. Why would they?

The 2k was the legal fees , house checks, purchase fees and the lot - litterally everything relating to anything was done by countrywide and their solicitor. There was no other costs involved from what i remember

wwl

sean1989 wrote: »

I think the solicitors are just explaining routes depending on the severity,

I class it as quite severe considering that 2 lives were at risk.

Whether or not we had the survey - is it ok for botched up jobs not to be declared in the first instance?
Us not having a survey is not an excuse for the seller to wire the house dangerously

Don't forget that the issue (as far as getting any redress) is not that it was in a dangerous state, just that in your opinion this was not made as clear to you as you think it should have been.
A seller has no duty to make sure the property is safe - properties can be sold in any condition (except maybe a malicious attempt to deliberately cause injury) - and the onus is on the buyer to establish fitness for purpose.
Any issues with building regs, part P etc. are between thr person who did the works and the enforcing authority, and probably far too late for anyone to take any action over.
The only thing that matters is if you can prove that the seller deliberately misrepresented things which would have materially affected the sale price. Fixing it at the time, before any fireworks probably wouldn't have been more than a days's work for a few hundred quid.
Seems your main argument is they claimed no electrical works on the form - maybe they just forgot some work done a few years ago?