Sellers solicitor is being obstructive

AdrianC

pittbakes wrote: »

We are happy paying for indemnity insurance, that's not the issue, the issue is the sellers solicitor keeps repeating that it isn't needed.

They think it isn't. You think it is. You're happy to pay. That one's sorted, then.

We're not happy paying for a deed of variation as it's likely to cost thousands.

And they're not happy to pay, since they don't think that's needed either.

Ignoring the issues not an option as our lender won't lend without these changes.

So that takes your options down to two...

* Pay for the deed.
* Walk away.

but their solicitor has banned ours from contacting the freeholder directly which seems a bit odd.

He can't. What's he going to do if you ignore his "ban" and contact the freeholder? Cry?

If it doesn't get rectified now we may well encounter the same issue when we sell the place.

Or you may not. So far, just from what we know in this thread, it's 50/50 whether any future solicitor will pick up on it.

pittbakes

I've just found out their last sale fell through due to the defective lease issue.

AdrianC

From the EA?

If that's so, then it appears there may well be a genuine issue, and their heads are in the sand.
That doesn't change your options, of course.

bouicca21

What is the defect on the lease? This may well impact on your ability to get a mortgage, as the lenders may pull out.

Is their 'solicitor' really a solicitor?

pittbakes

Yes EA has told me. I knew their last sale had fallen through but it was with a different EA so didn't know why. I think he's trying to persuade them to pay up on the deed of variation.

Yes he's a proper solicitor, I looked him up!

In any case our lender won't lend unless the lease is rectified and indemnity insurance isn't acceptable on the defective lease (though it is on the window thing) so one of us has got to pay. Will see how much it is.

Shahni

I had the same issue when I purchased. A deed of variation we thought was necessary and our lender refused to lend without, which the seller's solicitor kept insisting was unnecessary.

In my case the seller's solicitor went on holiday and her locum agreed it was necessary and sorted it out the next day, so we got around it. But I know that's not a lot of help to you. Our only other option I could see was walking away.

pinkteapot

I really don't see how the seller's solicitor can "ban" yours from contacting the freeholder. They surely have no authority to do that.

In every leasehold property I've lived in, new windows required freeholder consent. Could it be that the seller doesn't want your solicitor alerting the freeholder to the fact that new windows have been installed?

bouicca21

Also if a deed of variation is required then the freeholder must be involved. When I bought my flat, also with defective lease, my solicitor dealt with both the other side's solicitor and freeholder to obtain guarantees that the variation would be granted and what the freeholder's legal fees (to be borne by me in the form of an allowance by vendor) would be. No way would I have gone ahead without those guarantees.

I think the attempt to prevent you from contacting the freeholder is weird and definitely dodgy.

Ms_Sophia

OP, if your solicitors contact the freeholders just don't mention the new windows. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to buy an indemnity insurance for that. You could buiy it, but it would be invalid.

Hoploz

Yes, if the freeholder is made aware of the replacement windows, it would mean an indemnity policy would not be possible.
Point is, it is to insure against costs incurred if the freeholder should ever find out about the windows and demand some enormous sum for permission.