Sold house 8 months ago, buyer claims boiler not working!

frogernoff

Article50 wrote: »

Would agree with the last post say as little as possible. There is no guarantee after 8 months that he has not had all and sundry fiddling with system anyway . Presumably he must like cold showers having had no hot water for that time. At the end of the day he is trying to get a new heating system for free which has always been his objective.

I completely agree with you. He knew it was a back boiler when he viewed the house as I showed him. In an ideal world, we would have replaced it with a combi but it was working fine so we didn't.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

OP, I really wouldn't waste too much time and effort over this. I know a solicitor's letter is alarming, but this is really all guff and bluster and would be laughed out of a small claims court.

wesleyad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5497684

That's what can sometimes happen. I suspect that OP would have won absolutely if they'd stayed the course, but they agreed to a compromise position just to get it all over and done with.

Big difference here is that this "issue" has only been noticed 4 months after completion. In the other thread the boiler was noticed to be broken between exchange and completion (and so was highly likely to be broken at exchange).

DoaM

I agree ... I was simply highlighting that it's not always cut and dried, even when you appear to have a stonewall case, and small claims can be subject to District Judge lottery.

abby1234519

I would enclose a copy of the original letter in an envelop along with a piece of paper that says "NO" in Comic Sans, size 36.

dan23uk

frogernoff wrote: »

We had a back boiler which has one of those old fashioned fireplaces. When we moved in ten years ago, it's quite unsightly so we arranged for a gas engineer to come and have a look at it to see if he could remove it. As it was connected to the boiler, he took the front of the fireplace off and capped off the fireplace to make it safe. We put a radiator cover over it as it looked nicer.

The firefront forms part of the flue and removing it leaves the boiler classed as immediately dangerous.

stator

dan23uk wrote: »

The firefront forms part of the flue and removing it leaves the boiler classed as immediately dangerous.

And yet in 10 years they haven't died.
Regardless of any bad things that were done, the seller didn't warrant the boiler to be compliant or safe.

frogernoff

dan23uk wrote: »

The firefront forms part of the flue and removing it leaves the boiler classed as immediately dangerous.

That doesn't warrant a complete new boiler installation even if it does surely!

melanzana

So because purchaser only procured a "basic" survey for himself, YOU are bombarded with spurious claims.

I would send back the solicitor correspondence with a copy of the contract. No letter, nothing other than the contract, and details of your conveyancing solicitor, as Quizical mentions above. Let them slug out between them.

This is the most ridiculous try on I have come across, and I have seen many.

The purchaser's solicitor is rubbing his/her hands for fees though!

frogernoff

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

Speak to the solicitor who did your conveyancing.
They will put your mind at rest and make any recommendations.

Thank you, I've drafted a reply but will be speaking to the solicitor tomorrow