Estate agents misselling - Please Help !

mo786uk

I have some sympathy with the OP.

It is very easy for keyboard warriors to question why they did not just pull out but in reality these types of transactions take a long time to progress and there may be other important factors at play (i.e need somewhere to live as old accommodation running out) or financial (cannot afford fees to start process again elsewhere).

I think legally, the right thing may have been to pull out and then seek to reclaim those lost and more easily quantifiable costs - but as significant risk as it is not totally clear whose fault it is - the solicitor or the EA. It could also be a lengthy process that takes many months.

In answer to your question - the EA may have committed a criminal offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 if they did not take all reasonable steps to ensure their advertising was accurate. One might expect them to confirm with the vendor what the lease life was. That said, these cases are prosecuted by under funded Trading Standards and unless the EA is a problem in general then I don't see a prosecution happening. A prosecution primarily serves to punish an EA than to help you.

As far as a civil claim go you can write to the EA and complain and if no luck go via the Ombudsman or Court.

The problem is that as yo have now bought the flat the losses you have suffered are a lot harder to quantify. I don't think the fact that you purchased is a bar on a claim but by going ahead you have made it a lot more difficult. if you had pulled out then you may have had a clear claim to £3000 or whatever the costs were. That said, a court may have little sympathy and not award anything as they will say you weighed up the downsides and purchased anyway.

KRB2725

mo786uk wrote: »

I have some sympathy with the OP.

It is very easy for keyboard warriors to question why they did not just pull out but in reality these types of transactions take a long time to progress and there may be other important factors at play (i.e need somewhere to live as old accommodation running out) or financial (cannot afford fees to start process again elsewhere).

I think legally, the right thing may have been to pull out and then seek to reclaim those lost and more easily quantifiable costs - but as significant risk as it is not totally clear whose fault it is - the solicitor or the EA. It could also be a lengthy process that takes many months.

In answer to your question - the EA may have committed a criminal offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 if they did not take all reasonable steps to ensure their advertising was accurate. One might expect them to confirm with the vendor what the lease life was. That said, these cases are prosecuted by under funded Trading Standards and unless the EA is a problem in general then I don't see a prosecution happening. A prosecution primarily serves to punish an EA than to help you.

As far as a civil claim go you can write to the EA and complain and if no luck go via the Ombudsman or Court.


The problem is that as yo have now bought the flat the losses you have suffered are a lot harder to quantify. I don't think the fact that you purchased is a bar on a claim but by going ahead you have made it a lot more difficult. if you had pulled out then you may have had a clear claim to £3000 or whatever the costs were. That said, a court may have little sympathy and not award anything as they will say you weighed up the downsides and purchased anyway.

There is no proof to say this didn't happen. Just because the vendor is now saying that the agent didn't ask doesn't make it the true version of events. The agent may well have asked but the vendor either doesn't recall or is possibly worried they may be subject to a claim if they admit they gave false information.

I don't think people are being keyboard warriors, committing to spending a quarter of a million rather than losing an estimated 3K (seems high for a mortgage application and purchase fees) seems not to make much sense if you are not happy with the terms of the contract.

Thrugelmir

How did the surveyor value the property correctly for mortgage purposes if the lease term wasn't confirmed?

MyOnlyPost

doch007 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies.

It dosn't seem right that an agent can advertise what ever they like and make average Joe spend thousands before realising what they are buying is not what is advertised. In retail there are laws agaisnt this.

An agent can't advertise what ever they like, they do however make mistakes. You are missing the main point which is you found out about the lease before exchanging and went ahead anyway.

If you went in a shop and an item was in the sale but when you got it to the till the assistant pointed out before you paid for it that it was a mistake and the item was full price you would have 3 choices:
1) Buy it at full price
2) Put it back on the shelf
3) Haggle.

You wouldn't have the option to pay full price for it an then go back later and ask for compensation.

mufi

emmatthews wrote: »

There is no proof to say this didn't happen. Just because the vendor is now saying that the agent didn't ask doesn't make it the true version of events. The agent may well have asked but the vendor either doesn't recall or is possibly worried they may be subject to a claim if they admit they gave false information.

The vendor presumably signed off the estate agent's wording before the property was advertised.

KRB2725

mufi wrote: »

The vendor presumably signed off the estate agent's wording before the property was advertised.

Thank you, I missed that it was on the literature as well!

In that case, if the vendor has signed off the details then the agent cannot be held responsible - it's the solicitors job to check the lease.

hazyjo

mo786uk wrote: »

It is very easy for keyboard warriors to question why they did not just pull out but in reality these types of transactions take a long time to progress and there may be other important factors at play (i.e need somewhere to live as old accommodation running out) or financial (cannot afford fees to start process again elsewhere).

'keyboard warriors'?

Really?!

I take offence. Why is that being a keyboard warrior? Who has been abusive or aggressive?! How is it easier to just go ahead with a purchase of that size. One in three falls through - if the OP wasn't prepared for that (at any stage), they weren't in a position to buy. It was absolutely the time to pull out - or at least to renegotiate. Anyone in the chain could have pulled out - then what? That is the risk when buying here. Money can be lost and often is.

Back to your scenarios - of course people would have sympathy if we knew their reason for moving was one based on emotion - and usually offer their condolences or support - but the OP hasn't shared that and people on these boards tend to stick to the facts.

No idea what the £3k a day is all about.

mo786uk

The EA taking the vendors word for it would not IMO (and I stress that) be exercising due diligence. I would expect them to ask to see proof.

The EA have a duty to advertise accurately and the cost of doing checks should be incorporated into their fees.

csgohan4

mo786uk wrote: »

The EA taking the vendors word for it would not IMO (and I stress that) be exercising due diligence. I would expect them to ask to see proof.

The EA have a duty to advertise accurately and the cost of doing checks should be incorporated into their fees.

I disagree, it is buyer beware and Never take the EA's word for it, get a copy of the LR, you don't even need to wait for the solicitor to get it. 3 pounds, cost of a packet of crisps and a drink


You don't buy a used a car without checking it's history and current status.


Do you buy a house without looking yourself and getting a survey???

Lemonsqueezer78

As with most things that go badly wrong in life (and certainly in complex transactions with multiple cogs and gears), it is rarely down to a single attributable reason - and instead is almost always related to sequence of multiple events, making the quest to find a single responsible party nigh on impossible.

In this case, the Estate Agent, the vendor, your solicitor and you ALL played your parts in letting this happen. But crucially - it is you that made the final conscious eyes-wide-open decision to complete the purchase, despite what you had found out.

Limply stating that the seller "refused to negotiate" and that you had already sunk costs - which you admit were actually far less than the costs you were potentially going to bare in addressing the problem - are clearly not a valid excuse for the position you are now in.

You may have valid cause for complaint against multiple parties along the way - but a valid complaint is not the same as a case for full liability or any kind of significant compensation from a particular party . I strongly doubt you will be able to find anyone but yourself ultimately responsible for what has happened.

You should have done what thousands of prospective purchasers have to do every day - which is to mitigate your losses and pull out. You should have called the vendors bluff if she would not negotiate on price for a property that was clearly worth less than you thought. You didn't make the right choice in this case. You very obviously made what was essentially the "easiest" choice at the time, which was just to go ahead with things. And that choice has, unfortunately, cost you a lot of money and taught you a very good life lesson.