I'm now being sued by the purchaser

ikcdab

So last year we sold an unoccupied house. It went on the market in January 2015. We completed all the relevant disclosures (form TA6) and we tested and then correctly and truthfully signed to say that the heating system was working.
Two purchasers had surveys done but dropped out of the purchase and eventually we found a third purchaser. We were asked to review the disclosure forms and we again signed to say that the heating was OK, but we did not test it again. The purchaser decided not to have any surveys done.
We exchanged contracts and agreed a completion date. We agreed to give the purchaser access to the property under a key agreement after exchange to do some work and we were later surprised to be told by the purchaser that the heating was now not working. I immediately checked this and agreed - it was now not working. I suggested i would get my plumber to fix it, but the purchaser declined this offer and asked for a reduction in the purchase price, which we declined.
Completion went ahead in this sour atmosphere earlier this year. Today we have been informed that we are being taken to the county court for compensation of around £4500.

i believe we have no legal obligations on this. The buyer exchanged contracts without verifying the information given in the TA6 disclosure documents. The buyer declined to have any surveys done. We completed the disclosure docs in good faith and truthfully - the heating system was working when we signed them. However, we did not check it when we resigned them later. The purchaser had access to the property after exchange and did some plumbing work (a radiator was changed). This MIGHT possibly have caused a problem with the heating.

Where do we stand?

stator

Scotland or England?

ikcdab

Its in England

[Deleted User]

I believe you are correct - purchasers responsibility. The heating could have packed up 30 minutes after you had checked it. You offered to get it looked at - what more were you supposed to do?

pinkshoes

ikcdab wrote: »

So last year we sold an unoccupied house. It went on the market in January 2015. We completed all the relevant disclosures (form TA6) and we tested and then correctly and truthfully signed to say that the heating system was working.
Two purchasers had surveys done but dropped out of the purchase and eventually we found a third purchaser. We were asked to review the disclosure forms and we again signed to say that the heating was OK, but we did not test it again. The purchaser decided not to have any surveys done.
We exchanged contracts and agreed a completion date. We agreed to give the purchaser access to the property under a key agreement after exchange to do some work and we were later surprised to be told by the purchaser that the heating was now not working. I immediately checked this and agreed - it was now not working. I suggested i would get my plumber to fix it, but the purchaser declined this offer and asked for a reduction in the purchase price, which we declined.
Completion went ahead in this sour atmosphere earlier this year. Today we have been informed that we are being taken to the county court for compensation of around £4500.

i believe we have no legal obligations on this. The buyer exchanged contracts without verifying the information given in the TA6 disclosure documents. The buyer declined to have any surveys done. We completed the disclosure docs in good faith and truthfully - the heating system was working when we signed them. However, we did not check it when we resigned them later. The purchaser had access to the property after exchange and did some plumbing work (a radiator was changed). This MIGHT possibly have caused a problem with the heating.

Where do we stand?

To be fair, as far as you were concerned, the heating was working when you last tested it.

The buyer had ample opportunity to test it before exchange, but chose not to.

What was the exact wording of the form you signed about the heating working?

Thrugelmir

ikcdab wrote: »

We agreed to give the purchaser access to the property under a key agreement after exchange to do some work

Never a wise thing to do. Obvious conclusion is that this is the root of the problem though cannot be proven. Purchaser should have heating system examined themselves.

dc197

What is the wording of the summons or claim or whatever?

ikcdab

pinkshoes wrote: »

To be fair, as far as you were concerned, the heating was working when you last tested it.

The buyer had ample opportunity to test it before exchange, but chose not to.

What was the exact wording of the form you signed about the heating working?

It was the standard TA6 form - we just ticked a box to say that the heating was in good working order (which indeed it was at that time). I gave the last date it was serviced (which had been a couple of years before) and stated that i didnt know when it had been installed but knew it was prior to 2005.

Miss_Samantha

ikcdab wrote: »

Two purchasers had surveys done but dropped out of the purchase and eventually we found a third purchaser.

Strange for two buyers to drop out after having surveys done.

ikcdab

dc197 wrote: »

What is the wording of the summons or claim or whatever?

Hi Dc197

Well its a lengthy document.
I have a covering letter sent by the purchaser direct to me stating that the property was sold without a working heating system whereas the legal forms stated that it was OK.
There are several pages following with a detailed breakdown of the story I have relaid above. It does include some factual inaccuracies.
It is not a letter from a solicitor, but has been sent to us direct by the purchaser.

Mr.Generous

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

Strange for two buyers to drop out after having surveys done.

It has been known. Just been dealing with a sale where exactly this happened, 1st buyer claimed they didn't need a mortgage or have to sell house to justify low(ish) offer, in fact they did have to and were refused a mortgage until house sold. Back on market, 2nd buyer Chinese national, offer accepted, survey done - buyer went back to China for 3 weeks and not yet returned 3 months later. 3rd offer accepted exchange tomorrow.