Solicitor made mistake in sale info any comeback

deFoix

londonbabe73 wrote: »

Hi it was a title plan and yes I told my solicitor it was for flat a and I was told that both leases would be the same format but surprise surprised they weren't .
The lease in flat a states they have the right to park 2 motor cars on the drive my lease says I have a right to pass over the area but parking is not mentioned in my flats lease

Sounds harsh but you really should have read the lease yourself and understood that you had no right to park there before you exchanged contracts.

Also being told that 2 leases are the "same format" does not amount to "you have a right to park on the driveway".

marksoton

londonbabe73 wrote: »

Hi it was a title plan and yes I told my solicitor it was for flat a and I was told that both leases would be the same format but surprise surprised they weren't .
The lease in flat a states they have the right to park 2 motor cars on the drive my lease says I have a right to pass over the area but parking is not mentioned in my flats lease

Oh behave. You purchased a property based on someone else's lease and not your own?

In London, paying a premium.

Given there are only two parking spaces and both were included in lease A ( Which you don't own) why did you think some magical entitlement to a third spot was going to appear on your's?

G_M

londonbabe73 wrote: »

Hi it was a title plan and yes I told my solicitor it was for flat a and I was told that both leases would be the same format but surprise surprised they weren't .
The lease in flat a states they have the right to park 2 motor cars on the drive my lease says I have a right to pass over the area but parking is not mentioned in my flats lease

So

* you were buying flat b)
* the seller's solicitor sent your solicitor the lease & Plan to flat a)
* he sent it to you
* the lease showed the right to 2 parking spaces
* you told your solicitor it was the lease to the wrong flat
* your solicitor said 'never mind. your lease will be the same and you will have 2 parking spaces'
* it did not occur to you that there were not physically 4 spaces (2 for each flat)
* later after the purchase you somehow got hold of the lease & plan for flat b)

Something is not right above:

1) you believed you had 1 parking space, but the lease to flat a) which you and your solicitor had showed 2 spaces. How come?
2) it is unlikely a solicitor would accept the wrong lease (if he knew it was the wrong one) without givig you firm warnings about the risk and perhaps suggesting indemnity insurance
3) if your solicitor knew it was the wrong lease (because you had told him), and the corect lease was available (you now somehow have it) your solicitor would have obtained it at the time.

edit: just realised that back in post 5 you said:

There's a small car park which is adjacent to my property which isn't owned by either flat but the house next door but we have rights to park there or did.... ,

so the leases would be irrelevant. Since the parking area "isn't owned by either flat" the leases would not show the area.
"we have rights to park there..." implies some other legal arrangement.

So - as asked several times aleady:

What Plan are you referring to and what document led you (and/or your solicitor) to believe you had this right?

moneyistooshorttomention

I'm getting confused here.

There are two flats and two parking spaces - one of which you say used to belong to your flat.

Why do you think that that parking space (ie the one that used to be your flats) no longer is? What evidence has been provided and by whom to say that it no longer belongs to your flat?

Have you just been told verbally by the other flat-owner that they now have a second space - and it's the one that used to be yours? If so - why did you believe them (ie what evidence did they produce to say that "your" space is now theirs)?

G_M

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I'm getting confused here.

There are two flats and two parking spaces - one of which you say used to belong to your flat.

Why do you think that that parking space (ie the one that used to be your flats) no longer is? What evidence has been provided and by whom to say that it no longer belongs to your flat?

Have you just been told verbally by the other flat-owner that they now have a second space - and it's the one that used to be yours? If so - why did you believe them (ie what evidence did they produce to say that "your" space is now theirs)?

No need to be confused, it's perfectly clear:

OP & their solicitor were shown the lease Plan for downstairs and solicitor 'assumed' the upstairs flat would the the same.

Downstairs has both parking spaces - so that lease plan must have shown 2 spaces, thus the assumption that upstairs is the same meant 4 spaces in all.

There are 2 physical spaces.

However, these spaces do not belong to the property - they belong to the neighbouring property. So the OP and solicitor must have been looking at the neighbouring property's lease.

The downstairs flat has a 'right to use' the neighbour's space (or spaces?) and this right is imbeded in....umm... the lease..... errrr.... of.... either the OP's flat or perhaps.....errrr..... the downstairs flat... or maybe the neighbouring property's downstairs (or upstairs?) flat.

Or something!

Thrugelmir

londonbabe73 wrote: »

Hi it was a title plan and yes I told my solicitor it was for flat a and I was told that both leases would be the same format but surprise surprised they weren't .
The lease in flat a states they have the right to park 2 motor cars on the drive my lease says I have a right to pass over the area but parking is not mentioned in my flats lease

You haven't answered the question regarding your right to park on the drive outside no 3.

knightstyle

Wonder if you have ever met your solicitor? This looks to me like you used a far away on line conveyancer and you may have no come back.

davidmcn

knightstyle wrote: »

Wonder if you have ever met your solicitor? This looks to me like you used a far away on line conveyancer and you may have no come back.

Why do you think that would that make a difference to the solicitor's liability? If they gave duff advice to the OP (and that's a moderately-sized "if"...) then I would say the OP has a case.

hign10pines

londonbabe73 wrote: »

Hi it was a title plan and yes I told my solicitor it was for flat a and I was told that both leases would be the same format but surprise surprised they weren't .
The lease in flat a states they have the right to park 2 motor cars on the drive my lease says I have a right to pass over the area but parking is not mentioned in my flats lease

If there are only 2 parking spaces and flat A has the right to park two cars, how can your flat have the same lease? It is a 'first come first served' situation.

Is this a riddle to solve?

duchy

We are actually at the end of the process of successfully claiming substantial damages where my fiance's solicitor made assumptions about a flat lease which were incorrect rather than checking. It severely impacted on the flat's value and although has taken months the solicitor admitted liability fairly early on and their liability insurance covered it . We needed a specialist solicitor and if you feel you have a case and have the emails to back it up I'd suggest you contact one too for their opinion on if you have a case.