Seller lied to my face but i've finally found what I suspected

shaunhouse

After more than a year of looking for our "dream" house, we finally found a it in the perfect location. The house was up with an estate agent that is notorious for overpricing houses. In this case £475000 for a house thas market value is somewhere near £400000. We worked away at and we finally after about 4 weeks had an offer accepted at £410000.

The house was built in 1971, I was aware needed full rewire and bringing up to modern day standards. However when the surveyor visited the property to do a full survey he didnt really give me the report that I thought he would. He was happy to value the property at 410k and he didn't really do much of a write up on the visible cracks to the exterior and interior of the property.

It wasn't until I got a tree surgeon out that he made me fully aware that one tree was too close to the house and would / if not already cause problems and he suspected infestation could be a problem in a drain to the left of the property.

I requested full disclosure from the vendor about any past insurance claims and I spoke to the vendor on two occasions face to face in which he assured me the house was absoutly fine and that he had lived in the property for 15+ years with no issues. The vendor is a 87 year old man which is why I was perhaps a little bit softer on pushing this than usual. My suspicion is he is far more switched on than he makes out having been a colonal in the army.

We were due to exchange contracts yesterday providing everything was disclosed and sorted. On Wednesday I had the bombshell that 2 seperate claims had been made on insurance in 2012. One for the drains which were damaged and leaking and two for movement due to water washing away soil.

Absolutly gutted and I feel played.

moneyistooshorttomention

Is there any possibility that vendor has dementia and his mind has memory problems and has genuinely forgotten he did this - or did he seem fully healthy and it was deliberate?

For right now - what effect will his insurance claims have on your ownership of the house? Would you have greater difficulty getting the insurance cover you have decided on? Would your insurance cost you extra?

I guess you need to work out exactly what financial impact/sell the house on again later impact his claims would have on you and then assume he did know what he was doing and, either way (deliberate or no) demand an appropriate reduction on the agreed house price to compensate you for this.

shaunhouse

I thought he had many of the signs of Dementia yes. He got quite aggitated when we were looking at the left hand side of the house (where the subsidence repairs) have been carried out. But I do think he is switched on enough to have held this back. At the end of the day he provided the insurance inverstigation for both the drains and subsidence right at the end most likely in hope we didn't pick this up. Although he hasn't send the documents with details about repairs, certifcates or observations.

I don't think I would touch a house with subsidence no matter how serious it is and whether it has been repaired or not. I'm 1% hanging on for I don't know what but I have prepared myself for the worst.

Surveyor has agreed to refund me my money. Solicitor has put me in touch with someone for misrepresentation.

anselld

shaunhouse wrote: »

Buyer lied to my face

Seller presumably!

shaunhouse wrote: »

On Wednesday I had the bombshell that 2 seperate claims had been made on insurance in 2012. One for the drains which were damaged and leaking and two for movement due to water washing away soil.
Absolutly gutted and I feel played.

Should not really be classed as subsidence (i.e. ongoing progressive movement) since it was caused by a one-off event which was rectified. Should really have been declared but it does not sound serious enough to materially affect the transaction.

lincroft1710

Your "dream" house sounds a bit like a nightmare.

Army officers aren't immune from dementia, which can affect the memory in different ways. Not everyone with dementia behaves irrationally, especially in the early stages.

If you want to proceed have a proper survey carried out before exchange.

shaunhouse

That's an incredible assumption about something so serious. Even I don't know how serious the subsidence is yet but either way it has repucutions for selling and insuring the property so shouldn't be taken lightly.

The fact that the seller has tries to hide this from me is a red flag on its own.

marksoton

So walk away.

Quite what him having served as an army officer has to do with it i haven't a clue...

anselld

shaunhouse wrote: »

That's an incredible assumption about something so serious. Even I don't know how serious the subsidence is yet but either way it has repucutions for selling and insuring the property so shouldn't be taken lightly.

The fact that the seller has tries to hide this from me is a red flag on its own.

Well, I don't know your Surveyor or your Tree Surgeon but I would assume the Surveyor to be better qualified to assess the state of the building.

You also don't know if there is subsidence, but if your are still intending to buy then I would suggest you stop calling it that. The mention of the 'S' word to an insurer will put the price up regardless.

Old buildings move from time to time. If it is a one-off event it is usually called "historic movement". Not ideal but not something to go into a tailspin about.

Subsidence is a longer term event where movement is continuous until eventually arrested by underpinning, etc. Has anyone (qualified) actually told you there was a subsidence claim or that there is ongoing subsidence or a risk of subsidence?

If in doubt get structural engineer to do a specific report.

glasgowdan

marksoton wrote: »

So walk away.

Quite what him having served as an army officer has to do with it i haven't a clue...

Point was he held a senior rank and therefore has some savvy and political awareness about him.

Hoploz

shaunhouse wrote: »

On Wednesday I had the bombshell that 2 seperate claims had been made on insurance in 2012. One for the drains which were damaged and leaking and two for movement due to water washing away soil.

Absolutly gutted and I feel played.

You say you don't have the full details of these claims. It's entirely possible they had nothing to do with subsidence of the house due to trees.

There was damage to drains but you don't know whereabouts. The damaged drain or pipes could have been out front near the road rather than near the house. The damage could have been caused by something completely unrelated such as a heavy skip lorry in the driveway.

The movement caused by water washing away soil could equally have nothing to do with trees and indeed have more to do with the fact that the drain pipe further down had been damaged by the lorry so the waste water wasn't making it out to the sewers. Trees don't cause water to wash away soil - quite the opposite, in fact! This would be an isolated incident.

You need to find out more information in due course. It could still be your dream home. Don't let your annoyance with the seller cloud your view of the facts of the house. Find them out before you do anything rash.

AdrianC

shaunhouse wrote: »

The vendor is a 87 year old man which is why I was perhaps a little bit softer on pushing this than usual. My suspicion is he is far more switched on than he makes out having been a colonal in the army.

He's 87... Pause and think about that for a minute. He'd have been born in 1929, and would have been 18 in 1947 - not very long after the war ended...
The vast majority of 87yo men were in the military, unless they were physically unfit or otherwise ruled out of conscription. National Service didn't end until 1960.