Seller lied on property questionaire - Electrical fire

cattermole

chris_m wrote: »

I know the old sharia law allows for cutting off a hand for theft, but what gets cut off for getting a conveyancing wrong?

Thankfully only money ,:)

sean1989_2

cattermole wrote: »

Thankfully only money ,:)

Although i wouldnt mind it being more than that at this moment in time

#Headsrolling

cattermole

sean1989 wrote: »

The colour is exactly the same grey pvc cable - red black green wire inside. and it just says on both " made in the uk " and some other random stuff - both sets contain the same writing however couldnt see any dates.

After reading through every single bit of paperwork - there is actually no report on the house nor its condition. I do remember seeing the report to confirm its value - which said there was some minor shift expected with the age of the house etc etc but nothing relating to electrics.

I then found some lovely small print as always in the solicitors T+C stating "upon successful transfer of contracts the seller is not responsible for any repairs undertaking by you in the property"

Now - say if we were given the choice to have a full report on the property ( which we thought we had agreed to) and upon the answers chose not to "inspect" then im playing the "they lied to avoid it" card

i suppose its going to be a long drawn out case but i have much evidence to suggest they have tampered with things post 2005 and not declared this...

The seller lying and breaching contract is not covered by that clause.

Where you given the choice?

If your solicitor failed to advise you of any reasonable risks then they have a liability as well.

Tbh if you still haven't read your house insurance in all this going through the paperwork then its all a bit pointless giving advice.

AdrianC

sean1989 wrote: »

The colour is exactly the same grey pvc cable - red black green wire inside

So the old colouring.

Changing the cooker does not necessarily require "electrical work" - it may well be that the cooker just connects to a cooker point.

After reading through every single bit of paperwork - there is actually no report on the house nor its condition. I do remember seeing the report to confirm its value - which said there was some minor shift expected with the age of the house etc etc but nothing relating to electrics.

You must know what sort of survey you ordered and paid for...? In the absence of anything more than that, then it sounds like just a basic valuation survey for the lender. That says nothing more than "It's a house, it'll probably still be there next week, it's worth the price being paid." - in short, it tells the lender they probably aren't throwing their money away on a dilapidated shed. No more, no less. The person carrying out the valuation probably got out of his car, and may even have entered the property. Briefly.

sean1989 wrote: »

The unit is very old

But you knew that when you first viewed the property, right?

sean1989 wrote: »

The shower and the oven are very much new - so is the fully fitted kitchen that they had done before we purchased the property.

Same for the shower as the cooker - it could very easily just have been connected to existing wiring. But, with cooker and shower and fitted kitchen both freshly replaced, and the PIF saying "No" as well as "To Follow", yet the consumer unit apparently out of the ark, did your eyebrows not raise? Did you not think "Hmm, maybe I ought to get somebody to look at the electrics?" Did you not mention anything to the conveyancer?

sean1989 wrote: »

Well aware that some of the responsibility is ours however as first time buyers i expected the conveyancer to guide us through.

The conveyancer is a solicitor. His job is to make sure the paperwork is in order. He would not have even ever visited the property, and he is certainly not an electrical expert. That's the job you would normally pay a surveyor to do.

fashionvictim

Boiler should of had a gas safe certificate and an electrician is involved in putting in a new boiler (although I don't remember them being around for very long when we had ours done.) I'm not sure this is notifable on electrics side though - maybe someone else will know for sure

Also a new oven does not really need any one to do anything to your consumer unit if a like for like replacement. Unplug and plug in new one you just brought from the store. Only certain things are notifable to the council like new consumer unit

Properties teach us harsh lessons, I have even offered on a property before without checking the consumer unit. The pressure with the number of viewers and speed places sell makes us all rush.

You still need to get it fixed and pay for it so I'd focus on that.

sean1989_2

AdrianC wrote: »

So the old colouring.

Changing the cooker does not necessarily require "electrical work" - it may well be that the cooker just connects to a cooker point.



You must know what sort of survey you ordered and paid for...? In the absence of anything more than that, then it sounds like just a basic valuation survey for the lender. That says nothing more than "It's a house, it'll probably still be there next week, it's worth the price being paid." - in short, it tells the lender they probably aren't throwing their money away on a dilapidated shed. No more, no less. The person carrying out the valuation probably got out of his car, and may even have entered the property. Briefly.



But you knew that when you first viewed the property, right?



Same for the shower as the cooker - it could very easily just have been connected to existing wiring. But, with cooker and shower and fitted kitchen both freshly replaced, and the PIF saying "No" as well as "To Follow", yet the consumer unit apparently out of the ark, did your eyebrows not raise? Did you not think "Hmm, maybe I ought to get somebody to look at the electrics?" Did you not mention anything to the conveyancer?



The conveyancer is a solicitor. His job is to make sure the paperwork is in order. He would not have even ever visited the property, and he is certainly not an electrical expert. That's the job you would normally pay a surveyor to do.

Remember these issues have litterally all happened overnight - its only when an electrician visited the premises that we were advised everything is lethal.

Prior to this - although the box "looked" old - doesnt mean its not all working - the cover over the box made everything look fine - when the cover was removed the damage was clearly visible.

and i certainly wasnt given an option on what "survey" should be done - and say if we was and i had declined - this would have been based on them saying "no" we have not changed elctrics.

Ultimately - had we been given the choice of a full survey we would have... as we wasnt it looks like one wasnt done...however, has they asnwered "yes" we have completed electrical work - i would have been kicking and screaming and asking that checks were 1000000% done.

And the fact there is an invoice for the "removal of an old oven and fitting of new oven" - dated 2009 - this should have had a certificate surely? - there is an isolation box installed - but then hidden away and the oven has just been plugged into a random wall socket - am i to presume the installation people did this job and it was not changed after they were in?

So the insurance states
Your insurer also provides cover for:
C. Additional costs.
If the following costs are incurred with the consent of your insurer in
making good the insured loss or damage, your insurer will pay for:
i) Architects', surveyors', consulting engineers' and legal fees;
ii) The cost of clearing the site and making safe the damaged parts of
the buildings;
iii) Costs incurred solely because of the need to comply with any
statutory requirement or local authority by-law;
iv) The cost of making good damage to landscaped gardens caused by
Fire Brigade equipment and personnel in the course of combating
fire.

I hope that relates to electrical fire related issues and costs... but i will call them tomorrow to confirm...

AdrianC

sean1989 wrote: »

Remember these issues have litterally all happened overnight

Yes, that's my point.
You ignored all the cues that the electrics were ancient, and had probably been worked on, even though the paperwork said it hadn't.
You're FTBs without - and this is not a slight or a dig - much of a clue about property ownership and the potential pitfalls, yet you got no professional check of the state of the property.

Honestly, I think your comeback is limited, and your time, effort and money would be far better put towards moving onwards and sorting the problems. You might also like to get a survey done retrospectively, so that you have forewarning of any other hidden problems, and can prioritise the work you're going to need to do. There's no point in making good all the plaster and decor after rewiring if you also need to address damp or other issues.

GoldenShadow

I am really shocked that someone would faff around with electrics like this. Not much consolation, but at least you discovered it before something atrocious happened

I feel as though, with house buying, 'you win some, you lose some'. Out of all the homebuyer reports (lets not forget some don't even get them done) that say get the electrics checked by a qualified person, get the heating checked etc, I daresay many don't and that many are still fine.

I would be rather wary about other things they might have had a go at and make sure boiler etc is checked out.

phill99

sean1989 wrote: »

After reading through every single bit of paperwork - there is actually no report on the house nor its condition. I do remember seeing the report to confirm its value - which said there was some minor shift expected with the age of the house etc etc but nothing relating to electrics.

I then found some lovely small print as always in the solicitors T+C stating "upon successful transfer of contracts the seller is not responsible for any repairs undertaking by you in the property"

Now - say if we were given the choice to have a full report on the property ( which we thought we had agreed to) and upon the answers chose not to "inspect" then im playing the "they lied to avoid it" card

i suppose its going to be a long drawn out case but i have much evidence to suggest they have tampered with things post 2005 and not declared this...

So you have just paid out for the most expensive purchase of your life, you have NO REPORT ON THE HOUSE NOR ITS CONDITION? Are you seriously imbalanced? Have you not heard of caveat emptor? You have undertaken no due diligence whatsoever. You now find a problem and are throwing your teddy out of the pram. At what point did you decide to shell out hundreds of thousands of pounds and not commission a single professional or technician to inspect your property.

Your evidence that the previous owners have undettaken works outside of regulations is nothig but coincidental.

You have only yourself to blame.

davidmcn

sean1989 wrote: »

So the insurance states
Your insurer also provides cover for:
C. Additional costs.
If the following costs are incurred with the consent of your insurer in
making good the insured loss or damage, your insurer will pay for:
i) Architects', surveyors', consulting engineers' and legal fees;
ii) The cost of clearing the site and making safe the damaged parts of
the buildings;
iii) Costs incurred solely because of the need to comply with any
statutory requirement or local authority by-law;
iv) The cost of making good damage to landscaped gardens caused by
Fire Brigade equipment and personnel in the course of combating
fire.

I hope that relates to electrical fire related issues and costs...

Yes, but none of that helps you with a claim against the sellers.