I'm now being sued by the purchaser

bouicca21

Tbh, I'd be taking advice from my solicitor about how or whether to respond, not from an internet forum.

AylesburyDuck

paddy's_mum wrote: »

The OP perhaps needs to know that if formal proceedings are launched, he is expected to have made reasonable efforts to resolve the dispute in a genuine and fair way. My own feelings is that the offer to send in a plumber will be seen as fair and reasonable.

Equally (and this is important) the purchaser must also show that he has made reasonable and fair efforts to resolve the matter.

I suspect that sending in a somewhat intimidating and not-quite-the-truth letter with massively over-inflated financial demands will be viewed as exactly the opposite of reasonable, genuine and fair.

In the original post he states he offered to do this when the fault was discovered before completion took place. It was refused.
OP did what was reasonably expected already.

ikcdab

SnooksNJ wrote: »

haha money to heat the house, buy electric heaters, and £1500 for pain and discomfort when it's like 90 degrees out.
Where is the OP located because this is the kind of garbage that ties up the US County Court systems.

It was January in the UK.....

ikcdab

Mojisola wrote: »

And the buyer knew that they were buying a house without a working boiler because they had refused the offer to get it working.

They had the option to walk away if they were unhappy with that fact.

The heating was discovered to have stopped working after contracts had been exchanged and so the purchaser didnt really have the option of pulling out. They did ask for a £2k reduction on the purchase price but I declined that.

As mentioned above, as soon as I was notified of the problem I took my own plumber to the property and he said he could replace the heating pump for £300. He couldnt guanantee that this would fix it but as the boiler fired up but the rads didnt get hot, then it pointed strongly to the pump. The purchaser declined this offer despite it being a nil cost offer to them with no downsides. I made the offer as a goodwill gesture.
As also mentioned, under the key agreement, the purchaser moved a radiator, took out a cloakroom with its sink and toilet, fitted an electric shower, replaced the bathroom suite. Clearly its pretty obvious that this MIGHT have had a negative effect on a heating pump.

ikcdab

G_M wrote: »

Just a word of warning:

Just about everyone here has been telling you that the buyer has no justification and should be ignored.

Let me re-iterate that.... "ignored".

That means do not reply. It does not mean write back refusing to pay, or trying to justify/explain why you now think you should not pay.

DO NOT REPLY.

Replying will have 2 consequences:

1) it will open up a dialogue which will be tiresome, stressful and never-ending
2) it risks you inadvertantly saying something that could later be used in court (eg "I'm so sorry that....." which could be interpeted later by a judge as an admission)

Don't worry, I will not be replying to the letter. I have already sent a copy to our solicitor for information and I have spent today gathering together paperwork and collecting my thoughts.

Mocha61

You say you had a letter informing you will be taken to the county court, who is this letter from, is it the court with a claim number or from the purchasers?

Rainbowgirl84

The buyer refused the sellers offer of a repair which is not reasonable. If I buy a 10 year old car and it breaks down on the road home and the seller offers to get it repaired do you think I'm entitled to a brand new car, the cost of a hire car, my fuel costs and a few hundred quid for my distress? The three options open to the seller were repair, replace or a partial refund. The buyer cannot force the seller to pay more than is necessary to provide a remedy. The options were a £300 repair, £2k off the house price and now a £4.5k replacement claim.


I repeat the buyer refused a reasonable remedy.

paddy's_mum

Mocha61 wrote: »

You say you had a letter informing you will be taken to the county court, who is this letter from, is it the court with a claim number or from the purchasers?

Read post 10.

paddy's_mum

AylesburyDuck wrote: »

In the original post he states he offered to do this when the fault was discovered before completion took place. It was refused.
OP did what was reasonably expected already.

I think you have perhaps missed my point.

HM Courts expect (for which read 'we insist') that BOTH parties to the claim (ie the seller and the purchaser) to have done everything in their power to resolve the dispute without involving the court.

If the purchaser's response to a minor difficulty (to which he tacitly agreed) is to be firing off semi-threatening letters and outrageously inflated financial claims, then he is not acting as the court would expect.

This purchaser has to prove that he has himself behaved in a reasonable and fair manner before and during these pre-Small Claims Court negotiations. Claims that verge on the vexatious I-want-my-day-in-court are frowned upon.

County Court judges have a nasty little habit of applying common-sense that may well see this claimant awarded £1 in damages and no order for costs.

AylesburyDuck

paddy's_mum wrote: »

I think you have perhaps missed my point.

HM Courts expect (for which read 'we insist') that BOTH parties to the claim (ie the seller and the purchaser) to have done everything in their power to resolve the dispute without involving the court.

If the purchasers response to a minor difficulty (to which he tacitly agreed) is to be firing off semi-threatening letters and outrageously inflated financial claims, then he is not acting as the court would expect.

He ALSO has to prove that he has behaved in a reasonable and fair manner before and during these pre-Small Claims Court negotiations. Claims that verge on the vexatious I-want-my-day-in-court are frowned upon.

County Court judges have a nasty little habit of applying common-sense that may well see this claimant awarded £1 in damages and no order for costs.

Correct, i missed your point entirely Sorry. :doh: