Misrepresentation by vendor? Dry rot

Janey85

I would be grateful for your opinions as we have a rather unusual situation, involving a house purchase, a TV programme and recently discovered dry rot... (apologies for the long post)

We purchased our house just over one year ago. Prior to our purchase, it had been sold 6 months earlier at auction to a guy who owns a high end refurbishment company. We paid significantly more than had been paid at auction as the house had been fully done up, including rewiring, new plumbing, full redecoration, etc. Due to the fact it had previously been sold at auction, we undertook all suggested surveys - Home Buyer's, Structural and Damp/Timber. All came up with a few minor items but nothing significant, considering it is a Victorian end of terrace.

We had a few back and forths with the vendor (both in writing directly and via the solicitors) regarding a few damp/guttering/roof issues that were confirmed to be resolved prior to exchange. I have it in writing from both the vendor and his solicitor that "damp was identified and was corrected during the refurbishment".

On both occasions that our damp/timber surveyor attended the property, the builders were in attendance (very unhappy about our surveyor being there) and confirmed that the things he had raised previously were being dealt with.

Just around the time we exchanged, we were somewhat surprised to find our new home on a well-known house auction TV programme (I’m sure you can guess which one!). The presenter identified some areas of damp, which was later confirmed by the purchasers to have been "completely fixed". We were able to get our damp specialist to check the affected areas and he confirmed that it appeared to have been resolved, although with the caveat that it was difficult to be 100% certain as the plaster/paint was still drying. We were not too concerned as we had what we thought to be good assurances.

A couple of months ago, we noticed that a wooden architrave on the floor beneath where we had seen the damp identified on the TV programme appeared to be “buckling”. On closer inspection, and on pressing the wood, it easily dented. We got our damp surveyor back in to do a visual inspection and last week the invasive inspection was completed. It turns out that 70% of the architrave is completely rotten – dry rot. Following the path of the dry rot, it became clear that the area originally identified on the TV programme had not been treated in any way. It looks as though the dry rot originates around this first area and has spread out from there.

Both affected areas (the original area on the first floor and the second immediately underneath it on the ground floor) have had no form of treatment and evidence of damp/dry rot has been deliberately covered up. For example, the architrave has new wiring running up the inside of it, the original wood with dry rot has been left and plywood nailed over the top of the wires and the original wood. In effect, a housing has been built of plywood around the rotten wood and it has been painted over. (we have also been told by the surveyor that wires shouldn’t be “uncased” somewhere like this where anyone could hammer a nail into wood.)

In one way we are lucky – the surveyor believes that if this had remained undiscovered for another 3-6 months, it would have destroyed a structural part of the building and it would have reached the staircase - which could have been very dangerous. On the other hand, we bought this house and – in part – the amount paid included the expectation that all damp issues had been properly resolved by the vendor.

The surveyor looking at this problem for us now is the same one as prior to house purchase. He has told us that it would have been impossible to find these problems at the time of the purchase without doing an invasive inspection (i.e. walls would still appear to have some damp in them as the problem was only just rectified and the plaster/paint would take some time to dry out).

My question is this – does anyone think we have recourse against the vendor for misrepresentation? If so, what is the best course of action – contact the vendor? Solicitor? Small claims court? We are not looking for compensation for pain and suffering, or emotional distress, or anything like that - simply the value of the work that it will cost us to fix the dry rot problems. The amount for this remedial work is around £7-10k. We are also planning on getting a second opinion by a damp/timber surveyor to have a newly independent report done now (hopefully that will back up our current surveyor!)

In summary (if you are still reading - thank you!):
We have evidence that the vendor knew about the issue – and they lied when they told us it was fixed.
The vendor’s solicitor also confirmed in written correspondence that the problems would be fixed prior to purchase.
The builders doing the work for the vendor are the vendor’s own employees from his business - therefore I can't imagine he didn't know everything they found out/did.
We have surveys from before the purchase and a written survey now from the damp specialist.
Home insurance has been informed but I am not holding my breath!

Thanks so much for reading!
J

HouseBuyer77

Have you tried talking to the solicitor you used for the purchase? Chances are they'll direct you elsewhere if you need to take legal action but you may get some free/cheap advice out of them.

You the surveyor said didn't detect these problems because an invasive inspection would be required. However I thought a full building survey was invasive?

Though it sounds like the developer covered it up such that the surveyor would have started having to smash their way into the wall to see the problem so it's probably reasonable they didn't. Still worth asking another surveyor for a second opinion (first surveyor could be trying to cover himself to avoid you trying to claim against him).

The cost of the claim is beyond the small claims limit, so I think you'll need to get a solicitor involved.

On the other hand in the face of clear evidence the developer may just pay up.

HouseBuyer77

Or going down a totally different line of thought, you could try contacting the TV programme. They might love a juicy story about a dodgy developer...

Still I wouldn't go down that route to start with. Possibly useful later on.

Janey85

Thanks for your response, Housebuyer77. The structural survey is usually invasive but the one we had was a partial survey for other identified issues. As you say, any uncovering would have meant smashing up walls!

Thanks - I will also contact the solicitor used for the purchase.

I think the small claims limit has now increased to 10k so we may be okay on that side.

I am definitely keeping the TV Programme idea in my back pocket for now!

steampowered

As you have it in writing that the damp was 'corrected' and it was not, it sounds like you could have a misrepresentation claim against the seller.

There is a bit of a question mark in my mind as to what the word 'corrected' actually means.

For example perhaps they did do some correction work but it just wasn't comprehensive enough. However if the seller didn't do anything about the damp at all I suppose that would not be 'corrected' on any interpretation of the word.

The next step would be to write a 'letter before action' setting out what has happened and that you are considering bringing a misrepresentation claim in relation to their statement that the rot was corrected, giving them 14 days to respond. Then see what response you get. You could get a solicitor to help you with this if you wish.

david1951

Sounds like they did identify some damp and corrected it, so they haven't lied to you. Also the damp may be the cause of the dry rot, but they never made any promises about dry rot.


If they knew about the dry rot and didn't tell you then that is another matter. Can you prove that they would definitely have known there was dry rot? An easy defence would be that they never did an invasive inspection like you did, so how were they to know?

Chanes

You really need a sit down with a solicitor to go through your options, I would think you have a very fair argument! It makes me sick the lengths people go to hide truly serious problems when they are selling their houses, so sorry you found such a mess to deal with.

On a more sober thought, if someone thought it was OK to do this and sell it to you, what would stop them declaring bankruptcy and walking away rather than address the issue like a decent person would?

HouseBuyer77

Can you prove that they would definitely have known there was dry rot? An easy defence would be that they never did an invasive inspection like you did, so how were they to know?

. For example, the architrave has new wiring running up the inside of it, the original wood with dry rot has been left and plywood nailed over the top of the wires and the original wood.

Sounds like a pretty direct cover-up to me!

I am definitely keeping the TV Programme idea in my back pocket for now!

'Homes under the hammer special - When developers go rogue!'. Though if you did attempt to persue this, do remember that whilst having a media storm against them sounds fun you could open yourself up for libel claims, tread carefully!

Do you get legal cover with your home insurance?

Worth checking out Which legal too: https://legalservice.which.co.uk cheap annual membership and may be able to give some solid advice (even without membership looks like you can give them a call for a discussion).

The next step would be to write a 'letter before action' setting out what has happened and that you are considering bringing a misrepresentation claim in relation to their statement that the rot was corrected, giving them 14 days to respond. Then see what response you get. You could get a solicitor to help you with this if you wish.

Personally I'd avoid contacting them at all until you've had the second surveyors report and had a chat with a solicitor. If you are due 10k or so from them you don't want to mess things up by starting proceedings incorrectly.

Also if they actualy are a properly dodgy developer you may find they did all of their purchase and work via a shell company which promptly vanishes if they get a whiff of trouble!

HouseBuyer77

Another thought: The TV programme will have far more footage then what they actually broadcast. Could be they have something of use in there (assuming they've held on to it which is far from certain).

Cakeguts

How are you going to prove that the dry rot was there when you bought the house?

carefullycautious

This does not surprise me in the least. The programme you refer to shows, via the host, the problems such as dry rot, structural movement etc.


In some of the programmes the owner spends the least amount to gain the bigger profit when they sell on.


We have consistently said god help the poor buyers who don't know what has been covered up or filled in (Cracks being one of the red flags)


I bet there are many buyers out there who have been naïve and landed themselves with horrendous problems


Caveat emptor