Ombudsmen offer no protection for house-buyers...

Pamu_2

After purchasing our house we discovered that the existing Loft Conversion had not been built to Buildings Regulations (we have to rip it out and replace it at a cost of over £40,000 because it is unsafe). We complaint to the Ombudsman-Property about the surveyor who failed to pick up some very obvious signs (they awarded us £1,000 on the basis that whether they had spotted it or not, their advice would have remained the same - that our Legal Advisors should check out Buildings Regulations). We complained to The Property Ombudsman on the basis that the Estate Agent broke the law by failing to check that the building was described correctly. They offered us £400, on the basis that the Estate Agent was at fault, but our Legal Advisors were 'more at fault'. We complained to the Legal Ombudsman. They offered us £400, saying they were 'critical of the lawyer' but we should have explicitly told the lawyer that we were not sure whether there was Buildings Regulations approval for the loft conversion. They justified this on the basis that this was the second law firm we instructed (the first lawyers were so inept that we had to sack them) - however, the second law firm told us they were 'starting from scratch' and charged us their full fees. Clearly the Ombudsman exists only to protect the incompetent professionals, and not to support consumer rights. Disgusting, and devastating for us, as we will now be in financial difficulties for many years to come, for something that was not our fault.
I'm posting this as a cautionary tale, but if anyone has any advice or support for me, I would be eternally grateful!

mrginge

If you do not agree with the ruling, then presumably you can commence legal action against your solicitor?

AdrianC

Sorry, but I think you're doing well to have got £1,400 out of this, based on the very limited background you've given.

As you've been told, it's your solicitor's job, not the EA's, to check that the vendor's description is fully accurate and that you understand what paperwork is and isn't present. But the solicitor does need you to give them as much of a starting point as possible - remember, they don't visit the property. It is the surveyor's job to spot any potential defects in the property, but not to check up on the paperwork.

From what you say, it sounds as if the problem isn't that the conversion is "unsafe", just that it didn't get inspected and signed off for compliance with Building Regs. That's a very different thing from being actively unsafe, but - even if it is unsafe - it's almost certainly not something a surveyor would be able to pick up on without poking holes in walls etc, which is why BR sign-off needs to follow up on regular inspections throughout the work.

kingstreet

Did your surveyor not mention this and the need for building regulations to be checked?

Pamu_2

Mrgringe, thank you - Yes, I believe I can take the solicitor to court, but presumably that would be very expensive, and high risk - if the Legal Ombudsman offered £400, the courts could offer the same amount, and then we'd be in an even worse financial situation??

Pamu_2

Thanks Adrian C. The solicitor did have all the information - they had the surveyor's report that stated that the solicitor needed to check that Buildings Regs were in place, they also had our mortgage offer, which said the same, and they had the file from the previous solicitor which included correspondence about whether Buildings Regs were in place. So they knew that there was a loft conversion and that they needed to check Buildings Regs. They just didn't do it...

Pamu_2

Thanks, Kingstreet,
The surveyor's report stated that there was a loft conversion, and that the legal advisor needed to check that Buildings Regs had been obtained. However, the surveyor failed to spot the very obvious signs that the loft had not been bought according to Buildings Regs - for example the height of each stair has to be equal on the staircase to the loft. However, some of our stairs are 10x smaller than some of the other stairs. How a surveyor can fail to spot this is beyond me...

G_M

Estate agents are not surveyors and cannot check construction details. That's why you pay a surveyor.
They are also not lawyers. They cannot check legal details. That's why you pay a solicitor.
Indeed most EA advertising will make this clear and tell you to confirm details yourself.

Surveyors can only comment on what they see. If the supporting beams (for example) of an attic conversion are hidden beneath floorboards or behind plaster, they cannot magically know, or tell you, that they are the wrong size to support the weight.
They can (and usually do) warn you to check the correct documentation exists for the conversion (ie Planning and/or building regs).
Surveyors are not lawyers so will not check this themselves.

Lawyers will check whatever documents are apparantly relevant to the building. Some of these are standard for every building (eg is the seller the legal owner and thus able to sell) and some relate specifically to that building (eg it has an attic conversion that was completed after the date when Planning and/or Building regs were introduced.

The solicitor never visits the proprty. Unless you tell him there is an attic conversion he does not know, so will not check planning etc. If you had told him, either directly or by passing on the survey which itself asked the lawyer to check the attic, he should have asked the sellers about Planning/Building Regs.

I suspect from the sound of it as if you did not instruct your solicitor to check, or even that there was an attic conversion, and did not pass him the survey.

But maybe I'm wrong, and you did instruct the solicitor to check, he failed to do so, and in that case I'm surprised by the Legal Ombudsman's decision.

Pamu_2

Adrian C - I forgot to say, yes the loft is definitely unsafe, as it is missing the steel beams that should support the structure and prevent it pushing the walls outwards and putting undue pressure on the below. However, as you rightly say, the surveyor could not have spotted that element. The dodgy stairs, however, are quite another matter - especially when his survey went to the trouble of telling me that the cat-flap had some dry rot in it. (which is hardly a significant point!).

mrginge

Pamu wrote: »

Yes, I believe I can, but presumably that would be very expensive, and high risk - if the Legal Ombudsman offered £400, the courts could offer the same amount, and then we'd be in an even worse financial situation??

Well if the ombudsman didnt exist then your own private legal action would have been the course of action open to you, so the fact that it does exist but rules in a way that you don't agree with in effect makes no difference to your ultimate path of recourse.

The question of cost and risk comes down entirely to the strength of your case. If your case is strong then the risk is low and the costs will be low and probably recoverable from the defendant anyway.
If your case is weak, then yes the cost and risk is higher, but that therefore suggests that the ombudsmans ruling is not actually wrong.


The only way you will know whether you have a strong or weak case is to seek independant legal advice.

Thrugelmir

Pamu wrote: »

Adrian C - I forgot to say, yes the loft is definitely unsafe, as it is missing the steel beams that should support the structure and prevent it pushing the walls outwards and putting undue pressure on the below. However, as you rightly say, the surveyor could not have spotted that element. The dodgy stairs, however, are quite another matter - especially when his survey went to the trouble of telling me that the cat-flap had some dry rot in it. (which is hardly a significant point!).

Like most people. You'd probably spend more time getting a used car checked over than buying a house.

Was the surveyor purely performing a valuation on behalf of the lender? If so their responsibility would only to have been to highlight the requirement to check that the necessary permission had been sought and granted. Their role was not to survey the property and report back to you (in this instance).