Seller lied on property questionaire - Electrical fire

macman

Phew. A couple of points. Unless things have changed since I last bought a property (over ten years ago now), then even a full structural survey does not cover the electrics, gas or plumbing. The surveyor is not qualified to comment on any of those systems, other than to perhaps make vague suggestions based on visual inspection, along the lines of: 'the CU appears to be elderly and may require updating. The buyer should reply upon their own inspection'.
Having proof that the oven/hob/shower were replaced in 2005 does not prove that any work was done on the dedicated radial circuits that should supply those appliances (at least the hob and the shower). The vendor could simply claim that the appliances were replaced on a like for like basis, for which a minor works certificate is not required.
As was pointed out earlier, a 60A CU is outdated these days, but the fact that the MCB's connected to it total more than 60A is a complete red herring. My own CU is rated at 100A, but has MCB's totalling 168A, but it could never pull that amount, and if it did, the company fuse would blow anyway.
Given that the OP is in for £4K, I'd nevertheless suggest a small claims action anyway, since the extra cost will not be that much. However I'd rate their chances of success at much less than 50%.
The insurance will pay for putting the wiring back where it was before, not a complete rewire, as you'll need to put in a modern CU with RCD protection and add more sockets etc? A shower circuit should always have RCD protection added, whatever the age of the wiring, even though it's not a requirement.

Brown_Eyed_Girl

sean1989 wrote: »

So the official wording of any Condition's on the survey:

"the general condition of the property appears consistent with its age and type of construction, some works of repair and maintenance are required"

"Evidence of moment was observed in the form of an uneven floor. This appears to be long standing and the livelihood of further significant movement seems remote"

"are the repairs recommended as a condition of the mortgage or an engineers report required" - Marked "No"

When i queried with the mortgage company and the surveyors what "repairs" and "maintenance" is - they state " it is related to the condition of the doors in the house - uneven driveway and back garden, general condition of windows etc"

No electrics as i would guess

I think its safe to say this could be a very long process - if the home insurance don't pay out then its going to be a right ball ache

There should be a comment about electrics and it should be rated 3 - not because there was a problem with them but all surveyors will rate gas,electric and boilers as 3. They don't have knowledge in that area so unless the thing is flaming when they turn something on, or refuses to work etc they will always say
rated 3 - requires further inspection.

It's on almost every post on here that has the word survey so when it came up in mine I didn't freak out. That said, currently not got a plan to get a specialist round but I know that is on my head.

Jhoney_2

sean1989 wrote: »

So the official wording of any Condition's on the survey:

"the general condition of the property appears consistent with its age and type of construction, some works of repair and maintenance are required"

"Evidence of moment was observed in the form of an uneven floor. This appears to be long standing and the livelihood of further significant movement seems remote"

"are the repairs recommended as a condition of the mortgage or an engineers report required" - Marked "No"

When i queried with the mortgage company and the surveyors what "repairs" and "maintenance" is - they state " it is related to the condition of the doors in the house - uneven driveway and back garden, general condition of windows etc"

No electrics as i would guess

I think its safe to say this could be a very long process - if the home insurance don't pay out then its going to be a right ball ache

The highlighted section related to the integrity of the building - so a structural engineer. It does not in any way mean do not get or does not need an electrical or boiler/gas engineer, damp specialist or anything else.

If this is a homebuyer's report, it can only be in the sense that it is a report - and you were a homebuyer!

sean1989_2

I feel like this has been a real roller coaster of a ride so far - and i feel like the red button hasn't been pressed to start the buggering thing,

The estate agent confirmed that countrywide should have offered a survey as they don't offer one themselves (can someone confirm that? or are they palming the blame?)

I am starting to see why using an estate agents that works with conveyancers that works with the solicitors (for both parties) is not a good idea

Countrywide's home buyer survey is £400 - £600 apparently so i think with my fees totaling £2,000 i need to see what i have paid for.

I still think there's a leg to stand on from a legal perspective -

If someone has blatantly lied on the questionnaire and it can be evidenced then i don't see of a judge can look at it and say your claim is unjust.


I have now received several warnings off the electrician report which would invalidate my insurance if not fixed immediately and a problem were to arise because of this- oh happy days!

DaftyDuck

I've not posted on this thread before, as I've been a bit pressed with my own completion. Some of my comments have, no doubt, been covered by many posters before; apologies for spitting them out again. Also apologies for being blunt in places; it may save you heartache (and money) down the line, even if it's a bit sharp. 'pologies in advance...

It's certainly not up to the seller's agency to offer you a survey... there's certainly no palming of blame. However, although I've occasionally had a solicitor check I have arranged a survey, it's not up to them to offer or arrange one either; it's up to the purchaser to organise it. That's you, and your responsibility; I really don't think there's any escape from that and, nice though it might have been to have been advised to have one, I don't think there's any recourse on that front UNLESS you were charged for it, and it was not done, or a report was not forwarded to you. If that's true (paid, not received), you may be in the best situation...

What you appear to have quoted from is NOT a Homebuyer's Survey. It's a MOrtgage Valuation, a very different beast indeed. Certainly no need to go into electrical condition comments at all.

Sure, you need to see what your £2,000 covered. Unfortunately, the time to do that was before you instructed them, and certainly before you completed on the purchase. However, look to see if you were charged for a report that wasn't produced.... that may be key to getting some cash out of Countrywide to remedy the situation.

Your current insurance isn't likely to cover any defects already present in the wiring; indeed, presence of some of those defects might actually invalidate your insurance. The sparky you are reporting stating some of the defects doesn't sound as if he's actually able to be definitive about quite a bit of the dating; the presence of newer-coloured wiring isn't enough to date wiring work, as it was available well before ('leccies correct me, but some five or six years) the legal change. Most of the work you list is non-notifiable anyway. The previous owners also marked the PIF/F&F form with "No", but added "To follow"... and it appears nothing did follow. Their easy excuse in this case would be that they were seeking further advice as to what did actually count as electrical work (changing a lightbulb... changing a socket... adding a spur... adding a ring main.... installing a new CU... it's not all clear cut) and expected this to be chased by your solicitors.... and, frankly, it should have been.

However, I still don't think there's enough evidence that the faults I have seen you list are actually that bad... or (and I do believe you) were present at the time of completion. The vendor could easily state that some of this botch work must surely have been done after they left, since the wiring worked just fine for the time they were there, and for several months of your living there... {OK, I am playing Devils Apricot {Colemanballs } there; they'd be clutching at straws, but they will clutch...

Some of the wiring "defects" were obvious. Maybe not to a FTB, maybe not to me, but a surveyor would have raised the issue. He wouldn't state the wiring was fine, nor condemned it, but he would have hinted at his suspicions _ and he'd probably have had them!

You mention other things they've "lied" about... that's a strong word. I think flooding came up, that the garden flooded. But, what does the question they answered there actually state? I've just bought a property where I know the land floods. My solicitor constructed quite a detailed question about what parts of the property or curtilage flooded... as even the recent PIF isn't specific as to what flood risk should be declared.

You say:

If someone has blatantly lied on the questionnaire...

... that's just too, too strong. I don't see a blatant lie... I see someone adding "To follow" after a hesitant "No"... well, not hesitant at all, but that's no more dogmatic than stating it was blatant... (Devils Artichoke again... I do actually agree with you, I really do....)

Look, I have little doubt from what you have said that the vendors did push the boundaries of what they should have declared, and no doubt they did quite a few electrical thingies they should not, and did them badly. However, you will find it hugely difficult (£££) to chase them, and will be unlikely to succeed in getting a satisfactory result - in my opinion. One additional problem you will face if you chase them, is they will be able to argue that you should have had a survey and didn't (assuming you didn't... that's still unclear), and had you done so, they, as well as you, would have been better informed at sale time. The fact you didn't will lessen their responsibility before that point. You'd have to prove they actually mislead ... that there was intent to mislead. Now, since you managed to move into the house and live for a few months with no major problems, no fire, no blackout, how were those poor, ignorant, elderly and infirm sellers meant to know there was a problem, as you have proved by living there it wasn't obvious! They, the poor souls, were ripped off by evil tradesmen... cue hankie and snuffles all round.

Now, I know there are cases where a buyer has successfully chased a vendor for misleading statements. Such cases are rare. They normally follow from a buyer who has done sufficient Due Diligence for the vendor to be shown to have clearly and deliberately stopped a buyer from finding a truth. I suspect your lack of DD will play against any award. Indeed, I'm not sure that many (most) of the defects you mention are actually part of Part P wiring - although some certainly are. For the majority, the vendor can claim they didn't know, didn't actively lie... and then there's their get-out-of-jail-free " To follow" comment.... which should have been chased by your solicitor... and by you. I assume you had sight of the PIF/F&F forms (such as they were) before exchange? I know I always have had, and have always (always) returned a copy to my solicitor with scrawled comments for clarification. This time there were ten or fifteen, including getting statements like "is the cooker in a fully working state" and "is the Aga fully working, serviced, and being left in its entirety"... (I know I'm a smart-ar5e, and an experienced buyer, and I know it's not easy...)

OK... that's loads of criticism, and much of it may be deserved... some may well not be, but that's the beauty of the Internet, you may insult me back (feel free ), and it is meant to help you see it's not as black and white as you may see it. However, I do think others are at fault, and can be chased.

Firstly: did you receive a letter of engagement from your solicitor when you appointed them, and did it set out the terms on which they were working for you?
Secondly: Were you billed for a survey? What was stated, in writing, on the invoice? If you were billed for a Homebuyers, was it done? Did anyone actually attend the property and do one? Was a report written, and did you receive a copy? You've stated that

... it transpires that a surveyor did enter the premises and conduct a survey "the middle survey"

... has this been stated in writing? (Did you not wonder why you hadn't had sight of the survey at the time? What use is a survey, if not read?)

If no to any of those points, you do have a beef with your solicitor. They do have a duty of care towards you, and that should extend to performing all the services they say they will perform, and certainly all those they have charged you for.
Thirdly (and I need to find the bit you wrote and quote it...) which is a bit too complex for multitasking at the mo... and time's up, unfortunately!

One thing I would strongly recommend is to clearly sort out exactly what you want, what your evidence is, who you hold responsible for what before you contact your solicitor/insurer... you have obviously learned so much, comparing your first few posts with the later ones, you do not want to put your foot in it, and later change some detail... it will be leapt upon by all and sundry... Things like oven/hob and shower dates... I'm not at all sure they add anything; they don't necessarily have to be fitted by a registered person.

However, my final opinion (I have been too long!) may not be welcome. It's that you showed such little interest in Due Diligence when purchasing (not even checking what kind of survey had been done, if any), that you'll find it darn hard to get anyone else to assume any level of responsibility. Frankly, I don't think you will be able to get any financial settlement from the vendor, and it would not be worth trying. The only exception I see is if you were charged, by your solicitor, for a service that wasn't supplied. That's the only route that will bring success, I think.


Apologies for disjointed thoughts; working while writing, darn phone & emails keep going...

moneyistooshorttomention

It is indeed true that a homebuyer does need to think of/arrange a Homebuyers Survey (ie the standard mid-level one) or that highest-level survey themselves.

That is standard advice, ie that arranging the survey is up to the homebuyer themselves.

There may be an element of confusion going on here - in that I understand a homebuyer needing a mortgage is given no option but to have a survey (BUT it could end up being one of those low-level valuation "surveys" - which I understand may not amount to more than a "drive by" standard).

Hence why I didn't need a survey on Present House (as I wasn't taking out a mortgage) - but got one anyway (ie that mid-level Homebuyer Survey) to try and ensure I had "done my bit" to get a reasonable level of protection as to the standard of the house. The vendors estate agent only came into the picture there because I asked them to provide me with details of several different local surveyors (so that I could choose one of them).

Sunshine62

sean1989 wrote: »

Including (something i wasn't aware of) our hob being too close to the sink - can someone confirm if they are aware of limits with hobs and sink? the gap is probably 1/2 meter if that

No expert but I seem to remember it has to be "at least 1m from electrics sockets etc."


Different for a bathroom.....much stricter regulations there. For instance ideal place for light switch is outside on the landing....we insisted on this when we had our place rewired a month after moving in.

DaftyDuck

Sunshine62 wrote: »

No expert but I seem to remember it has to be "at least 1m from electrics sockets etc."


Different for a bathroom.....much stricter regulations there. For instance ideal place for light switch is outside on the landing....we insisted on this when we had our place rewired a month after moving in.

.. would apply to a new socket or hob point, certainly, but there's no regulation applying to selling a house with an ancient socket that's been historically placed right over a sink! It'd still be dangerous, just not against a regulation not in force at the time.

And insurance isn't going to look too kindly on a claim for even electrical repairs, when there was no survey on purchase, and no attempt made to rectify/improve an ageing system... they may well refuse to repair any of it, or the resulting damage.

Jhoney_2

sean1989 wrote: »

I would agree FTB just make sure you send in professionals on the electrics, gas and anything else that you thought hmmm

Had the home insurance surveyor attend and he said it looks pretty bad indeed however, when i said - ignore the burn marks and the smell of the burning and what does it look like?

He said "well looks ok to be honest"

Just goes to show that looks certainly are not everything!

The surveyor did however say this is probably a full rewire job looking at the damage.


We have an electrician now on their way to do a full electrical report - another £80.00 down

sean1989 wrote: »

so...where to begin...

Electrical testing - erm...

4 plug sockets burnt out
2 lights burnt out
dangerous earth level readings throughout the property
Overloading of the fuse box
2 fire hazards
confirmed rewiring throughout the house sparky spotted some wiring the had been cut into using new wiring all different colours tell dates apparently
3 warnings being issued
Fuse box is needing urgent replacement

Recommended full rewire of property

Lesson number 1 when buying a house - Call in the sparky before you even think about anything

and then,,,,

I have now received several warnings off the electrician report which would invalidate my insurance if not fixed immediately and a problem were to arise because of this.

The textbook reality of the gulf between a surveyors opine vs a professional assessment.

Sorry to keep hammering it home OP, I feel for you - but i'm kind of annoyed with you too. You could have gotten very badly injured or worse AND you should have had this covered.

By your own account it could of cost you your life - no note to self would be applicable at that point!

Thank goodness you are unharmed - even if somewhat out of pocket - but I am trying to flag it up for others readers as well now.

It's too important to be overstated. Buyer Beware!

sean1989_2

Jhoney wrote: »

and then,,,,

I have now received several warnings off the electrician report which would invalidate my insurance if not fixed immediately and a problem were to arise because of this.

The textbook reality of the gulf between a surveyors opine vs a professional assessment.

Sorry to keep hammering it home OP, I feel for you - but i'm kind of annoyed with you too. You could have gotten very badly injured or worse AND you should have had this covered.

By your own account it could of cost you your life - no note to self would be applicable at that point!

Thank goodness you are unharmed - even if somewhat out of pocket - but I am trying to flag it up for others readers as well now.

It's too important to be overstated. Buyer Beware!

Yeah its very important that other readers certainly understand what needs to be done when purchasing a property.

I have dug out paperwork and it is slowly transpiring that there is just no survey completed at any level on the property.

whilst i understand ( no really i do ) about the fact this is my responsibility to check this is done or request this to be done - at what stage did my solicitor not think to question why it had not or ask me to have it done - after all were buying a 1950's build house what could possibly go wrong.

I cant excuse my lack of due diligence but for FTB's maybe there should be a little more clarity on whats happening and whats not, rather than a bombardment of paperwork all at once. I tried to read as much as i could but clearly have missed many "IMPORTANT" things.

After now filtering through all the paperwork from countrywide i am starting to find a few things i that certainly need to be clarified ( much of this paperwork was received on the 1st October)

I still believe that the seller in this instance has tried to cover up very botched jobs by not declaring them - if countrywide to provide a statement saying that "electrical works is everything electrical" then i guess in the long run - it may be countrywide that find themselves facing the blame due to not being clear in their instructions.

the next issue we face and could potentially explore (but more than likely will not) is:
The seller is burdened with debt
3 charging orders on the property
we was billed in error for their last gas bill of £2k
constant nuisance calls from debt collectors ( i have worked in debt management and when companies leave their names - well aware of who they are)
Was put on prepayment electric in 2007 ( love how companies break data protection to allow us to know this)

not saying this is true and is only speculation but - electrical fires that cause a full house to burn down can give a nice insurance claim.

It became apparent today(The neighbor told me) that they had moved out very quickly but returned every day to obtain post. They vacated the premises months before completion - we was never informed of this. Could this have been the time the electrics were tampered with? who knows...

Daftyduck - your post was very descriptive and made much sense in several ways! i applaud you for your time and effort