Oh dear me....

marksoton

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3561402/Top-QC-loses-six-year-legal-fight-3-6m-dream-home-riddled-dry-rot.html

Even people buying ( Or more to the point not ) high end properties can screw it right up...

bobbymotors

Just shows you, once you've exchanged, you've exchanged....caveat emptor and all that!

AdrianC

Good ol' Brownshirt.

The headline shouts about "rising damp" and "dry rot" - then quotes the judge referring to fixing "penetrating damp" at "no great expense". Now, which of the two is more likely to have got that wrong?

Sounds like he exchanged contracts - but without the deposit being paid in full - then got a survey done (or, more likely, read it).

marksoton

AdrianC wrote: »

Good ol' Brownshirt.

The headline shouts about "rising damp" and "dry rot" - then quotes the judge referring to fixing "penetrating damp" at "no great expense". Now, which of the two is more likely to have got that wrong?

Sounds like he exchanged contracts - but without the deposit being paid in full - then got a survey done (or, more likely, read it).

I always have a peruse. Mainly for comedy value. I wouldn't trust the journalistic accuracy one bit...

stokesley

marksoton wrote: »

Even people buying ( Or more to the point not ) high end properties can screw it right up...

If I've skim read it right, even a property lawyer...

mrginge

Damn you and your clickbait.

Now gchq will have me logged as a daily mail reader.

poppy10_2

mrginge wrote: »

Damn you and your clickbait.

Now gchq will have me logged as a daily mail reader.

This will come in useful next time:
Daily Mail Link Blocker

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

stokesley wrote: »

If I've skim read it right, even a property lawyer...

There's a strange delusion that takes hold of lawyers when it comes to their personal affairs. They can get into a place where they think that because they know the law so well, if they really really care about a case then they will be able to find an interpretation that suits their interests. They then take the most unwinnable cases to court, which they would refuse to handle for a client. It's quite odd. Someone should study it.

McTaggus

My old LL was a lawyer and also seemed to have a self-directed understanding of what the law means when it comes to rental properties, such as accessing it whenever it took LL's fancy (i.e. when we were on holiday)… It is funny really - perhaps because they deal with the system every day, its almost as though they think they are above the law, or could at least wrangle enough of their own interpretation of the law into any argument (if ever contested) to persuade the courts that their behaviour is legal...

fairy_lights

Why didn't he just get the survey done before they exchanged?
Bizarre. And I bet the owners of other country piles are going to be reluctant to sell to him now in case he tries it again.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

McTaggus wrote: »

My old LL was a lawyer and also seemed to have a self-directed understanding of what the law means when it comes to rental properties, such as accessing it whenever it took LL's fancy (i.e. when we were on holiday)… It is funny really - perhaps because they deal with the system every day, its almost as though they think they are above the law, or could at least wrangle enough of their own interpretation of the law into any argument (if ever contested) to persuade the courts that their behaviour is legal...

Exactly this. It's very strange.