Seller lied on property questionaire - Electrical fire

sean1989_2

Jhoney wrote: »

Not your fault OP, but your responsibility which is a very different thing altogether.

True - theres no legal obligation for surveys which im sure soon into the future would change if more and more people fall victim to this sort of stuff.

so upon looking at the "questionaire" it is indeed just a really old copy and paste job from word... am i to believe this is just "typical procedure" or should the conveyance team actually be using more in depth paperwork?

phill99

This is boring me now.

AdrianC

sean1989 wrote: »

A couple who answered "no" on a standard conveyancing form which asked if they were aware of any disputes about the property they were selling have been found liable for fraudulent misrepresentation and have had to pay their buyers £67,500 in compensation and costs.

The case, which lawyers believe is the first of its kind, is a dire warning for anyone embroiled in a dispute with a neighbour

So a neighbour dispute... Not the same thing at all. Not only is there absolutely no plausible deniability - which there is with yours - there's a huge key difference. The buyers had done all reasonably expected due diligence, if not more.

£68k is a big number. Most of that, it seems, is devaluation, because the property now has serious right of way issues, which cannot easily be worked-around. The rest is legal costs. Your property has no devaluation, just a bill of a couple of grand, which you could (arguably should) easily have foreseen before purchase.

sean1989 wrote: »

True - theres no legal obligation for surveys which im sure soon into the future would change if more and more people fall victim to this sort of stuff.

So - lemme be sure I've got this right. Because you failed to do basic research to understand the process, the law should change to make every single property buyer have to pay for a survey?

sean1989_2

AdrianC wrote: »

So - lemme be sure I've got this right. Because you failed to do basic research to understand the process, the law should change to make every single property buyer have to pay for a survey?

I dont recall saying that - but wouldnt it make the world a much better place if it was involved in the sellers costs to prove that the house was in fine condition?

AdrianC

sean1989 wrote: »

I dont recall saying that

Then perhaps you'd explain what you did mean by...

theres no legal obligation for surveys which im sure soon into the future would change if more and more people fall victim to this sort of stuff.

if not that there should be a legal obligation to get a survey?

- but wouldnt it make the world a much better place if it was involved in the sellers costs to prove that the house was in fine condition?

Sorry - lemme get this straight. You're in the middle of accusing the vendors of trying to kill you, but you'd trust a survey that the sellers had commissioned and paid for...?

Thrugelmir

sean1989 wrote: »

I dont recall saying that - but wouldnt it make the world a much better place if it was involved in the sellers costs to prove that the house was in fine condition?

Ever bought a second hand vehicle in your life?

kinger101

sean1989 wrote: »

Redgrave v Hurd (1881) 20 Ch D 1 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation. It holds that a contract can be rescinded for innocent misrepresentation, even where the representee also had the chance to verify the false statement.

and others?

Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 Ch D 459

Nottingham Brick & Tile Co v Butler (1889) 16 QBD 778

Whittington v Seale-Hayne (1900) 82 LT 49

Rescinded contracts due to misrepresentation....

Probably something more frequent as well... but i didn't have time to find everything

If you're such a expert, why are you asking random people whom you don't know for advice. Have your day in court.

sean1989_2

AdrianC wrote: »

Then perhaps you'd explain what you did mean by...

if not that there should be a legal obligation to get a survey?



Sorry - lemme get this straight. You're in the middle of accusing the vendors of trying to kill you, but you'd trust a survey that the sellers had commissioned and paid for...?

sir...your forum skills are that of a jedi... its hard to even

But no - what im saying is surely something should be implemented that would result in the important parts of the house being checked - example, the owners have not tampered with the electricity or gas supply before leaving. These are potentially life threatening if they have done so - trust me - the day you have an electrician turn around and tell you that your lucky to be alive because of the botched up job on the CU - then you can have a go at me for wanting some sort of answer to what has happened...

Heres an update anyway,

1) Countrywide have started investigating the complaint and have written to the sellers solicitors for answers

2) The electric board have visted the property tonight as something i had not spotted previously - the securtiy wire was not on the main fuse box - they have come out and investigated but cant find any issues with the main fuse - they wasnt too happy that someone had snooped in there but hey ho

3) the home insurance are coming in the morning at 10:30 to assess the issues and hopefully book in a fix asap

4) based on the report of the intial electrician, the bills, and the serial number of the shower - plus the insurance report i will obtain tomorrow - an independent solicitor is more than happy to take on the case to seek some compensation - remember whilst the electric is the main issue - there are other areas that lies have been told:
Was not made aware they had planning permission declined for the extension - yet its built - theres an insurance policy thats been sent with the final paperwork making reference to this
the garden floods in the rain due to no drainage etc

In my OP i was talking about the electric quite frankly because its in my opinion the most major part of the lies

cattermole

I may be in the minority, but I can understand how upset you would be, and be so persistent in your posting, it isn't just the cost it's the fact their could have been a fire or worse still a death. It's a way of venting apart from anything else

If the solicitors used the wrong forms this is an error and potentially a serious one.

I don't know the old forms but clearly the new one clearly asks if the property has ever had an electrical inspection. Whilst yes it is up to you to research the property the Solicitor still is obliged to point out any risks or follow things through not just for you but for the lender. Again I can only refer you and others to what our buyer's solicitor asked for regarding an Electrical Inspection and a friend being advised in writing to have a full structural survey done on another purchase.

I also disagree with other posters saying that it is not up to the Solicitor to double check everything, that is what you are paying for, people may accept low standards from their Conveyancing, I for one would not.

I'm a bit confused now because you have said your conveyance is contacting theirs I thought they were the same you said or are they in different offices in the same company?

There does seem to be clear visual evidence of the wiring being re-routed that is not replacing like for like, that is re-wiring to a "protected area". The question is when did this happen and can it be proven?

Also you said the Conveyancer is looking into it and gave you information about the Legal Ombudsman. You need to put your complaint to them in writing first, you cannot go to the Ombudsman until you have exhausted their complaints procedure and I would ask to be sent a copy of it. Also each company has to have a Complaints Handler you can request the name of the Handler via the following email http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/for-the-public/faqs/complaining-about-a-solicitor/ I emailed them and got a response saying they would respond within 5 days but the next day the details were sent through.

Any complaint has to be clear, what you think they did wrong and what you expect them to do to put it right and this can include a refund of their fees. As I said I have made a complaint to our Solicitor and was pleasantly surprised they have upheld all our complaints and agreed to waive the fee for the purchase and £100 off the sale. I could go to the Ombudsman if I wasn't satisfied with their offer but I am. It was purely because they did not double check the paperwork properly and missed two things, which could have led to a "material" loss their words not mine.

Another side point in response to your last post is the Homebuyer's pack (which was abandoned) did mean sellers had to have an Electrical Test done prior to putting the property on the market.

You must have a Completion statement? This should outline all the costs so your £2000 should be accounted for on that statement, you haven't mentioned it so suggest you dig it out from all your paperwork and be exactly clear on what you are supposed to have paid for.

£2000 sounds a lot unless you paid a lot of stamp duty?

The likelihood of the sale being overturned is nil I would say. Even if you were to prove the sellers were negligent deliberately. So you need to clearly decide what your objectives are and that they attainable.

ManuelG

cattermole wrote: »

I may be in the majority, but I can understand how upset you would be, and be so persistent in your posting, it isn't just the cost it's the fact their could have been a fire or worse still a death. It's a way of venting apart from anything else

Minority, or majority?

Anyway, all I'd say to the OP is to be absolutely sure their solicitors think they have a good chance of a result, as opposed to the abstract concept of having a case they can make. One has a chance of success, the other could cost more than the repairs...

Sometimes pragmatism has to take over from idealism.