Help - Vendor suing us after delayed completion!

martinsurrey

PasturesNew wrote: »

let them know that, ultimately, it's out of your court now ...

Unfortunately they cant say that because its not true.

OP's liability to the upwards chain is not dependent on the recovery from the people below.

if the OP's buyers cant pay, it'll be a net cost to the OP.

although the solicitors PI insurance should cover it, so it wont be an issue, it doesn't change the ultimate person liable at each stage.

TR1

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Dont pay them until you've been paid...Once you've been reimbursed, then pay your vendors.

Can you do that?

david1951

I don't think you can just 'pass on' the vendor's claim without challenging it, as you are ultimately liable for it. Your vendors have a duty to mitigate their costs, but so do you.

Make sure they can prove their costs (e.g., receipts/invoices) and that these were kept to a minimum (did they stay in the Ritz, etc.), because you will likely have to do the same when you pass it on.

I also think £4000 is probably not excessive.

pinkshoes

TR1 wrote: »

I should have mentioned that the Vendors are a bloody nightmare. They're claiming £4000+ for compensation, hotel, food, clothes, removal etc. for the four days that it took them to re-book their removals who drove back to Kent from Yorkshire after failed completion. I do understand how incredibly frustrating it is for them - but £4000+ is excessive.

Is it excessive??

The removal van had driven for SEVEN hours up to Yorkshire, but no house to unload into.

They therefore had to drive SEVEN hours back, put the stuff into storage, load it back onto the lorry, then drive seven hours back up to Yorkshire.

A removal to Yorkshire from Kent isn't going to be cheap, as it will require an overnight stay no doubt due to the hours of driving. I would imagine that would come to £2000, perhaps more depending on the company.

The rest depends on availability of hotels etc... Friday nights often get booked up, so they may have had to pay quite a lot. Obviously they can't take the p*ss, but it is inconvenient when you have so much else to sort out to expect someone to go phoning round hotels looking for the cheapest room.

All you can do is say you are happy to pay their out of pocket expenses, but can only do this once they have provided you with receipts for all goods and services claimed.

Quantify your own losses, then contact your own buyer immediately saying how much you are claiming, a copy of all receipts, and when you want a response by.

eddddy

Is the £4k definitely the full and final claim? Or are there others higher up the chain who will be preparing claims as well?

Given the potential complexities, I think I would consider getting advice from a litigation solicitor, with experience in 'failed completions'.

saajan_12

TR1 wrote: »

I should have mentioned that the Vendors are a bloody nightmare. They're claiming £4000+ for compensation, hotel, food, clothes- fair enough,
they would have little clothes, food etc to hand, and are entitled to stay fairly comfortably in a hotel, removal etc. for the four days that it took them to re-book their removals who drove back to Kent from Yorkshire after failed completion. - so that's 2 extra journeys, plus storage in the van or a warehouse.. sounds like £3000+ just from that I do understand how incredibly frustrating it is for them - but £4000+ is excessive.
They somehow got my mobile no. from the EA (evidently terrible) and so called me yesterday to inform of proceedings as advised by their solicitor.- I know it feels like an invasion, but probably saved some stress in waiting for solicitors to convey things

No, they stayed in Yorkshire and so claimed for hotel for 4 nights

Their expense claim is excessive.

We were told by the Vendors EA who had mistakenly given us the keys. It would have been much easier for every to move in with an undertaking - but our Vendors (who I mentioned were a nightmare) refused to do this.- well that's their choice. As your vendors were that much further from the issue with sort codes, they may have been worried about having to evict you if completion never did happen.

This is what I had hoped for - but it's been a month now and our buyers solicitor (the one who made the mistake) hasn't responded to any emails/calls from our solicitor or the vendors solicitor

Our solicitor checked and confirmed that he had provided correct details. Apparently, our buyers solicitor mixed up the sort code with another one. Thankfully the money didn't go in to another (someone elses) account as I'm sure this would have messed up the sale completely - so you claim from your buyers, and they can claim from their solicitors.

Our trouble now is that we don't have £4000+ to pay our vendors, even if we can recoup it from our buyers!- explain to your vendors that you are chasing payment from your buyers and that the solicitors liability will be covered by their insurance, so being able to pay shouldn't be an issue. Suggest a pyament plan while you wait for the money from your buyers, whatever you can to avoid the vendors suing you and increasing the claim to include court costs.

I understand that the vendors are making things more stressful for you, but from their point of view, they were majorly inconvenienced by having ot stay in a hotel for half a week. Conservatively, I think

* Removals: extra trip back to Kent likely late at night, storage for 4 days, extra trip to Yorkshire.. £3000?
* hotel 4 nights for a family £400
* food 4 days for a family without cooking facilities £200
* clothes, basic toiletries £100

£4000 doesn't seem too far off the mark, and this is before taking any compensation for spending 4 days without their possessions, making arrangements for removals, not being able to unpack and settle in.

Guest101

Until you receive a letter before action or court papers I'd do nothing, BUT pass on the claim and your own to your buyer.


It's just common courtesy.

TR1

pinkshoes wrote: »

Is it excessive??. During the sale they mentioned that they had friends to stay with in Yorkshire - they left a few days before completion to stay with them, so we feel as though they're inflating their claim. I suppose the receipts/invoices will clear that up

eddddy wrote: »

Is the £4k definitely the full and final claim? Or are there others higher up the chain who will be preparing claims as well? - We don't believe that there are any costs further up the chain, £4k was the vague figure given to us over the phone yesterday

Given the potential complexities, I think I would consider getting advice from a litigation solicitor, with experience in 'failed completions'.I think you're right!

saajan_12 wrote: »

I understand that the vendors are making things more stressful for you, but from their point of view, they were majorly inconvenienced by having ot stay in a hotel for half a week. - I completely appreciate that they were inconvenienced and put out - we were literally in the same position as them (albeit, closer to home). The difference being that we didn't make things as difficult as they did. If they had agreed to an undertaking for the rest of the chain to move in without completing (completed on the Monday) this would have all been avoided - they were the only ones in the whole chain not to agree to this. Yes, I understand that if anything had gone wrong they would have had to evict us etc. but I understand an undertaking is quite common in this scenario. They were difficult throughout the sale and I strongly believe that their stubbornness made it worse. [/B] Conservatively, I think

* Removals: extra trip back to Kent likely late at night, storage for 4 days, extra trip to Yorkshire.. £3000?
* hotel 4 nights for a family £400
* food 4 days for a family without cooking facilities £200
* clothes, basic toiletries £100

£4000 doesn't seem too far off the mark, and this is before taking any compensation for spending 4 days without their possessions, making arrangements for removals, not being able to unpack and settle in.

I think you're right and I can see how the costs could add up, but I do believe that they failed to be conservative and allowed costs to inflate - especially as I understand that they had somewhere to stay, It makes it worse that we're claiming for two days off work and just the hotel - so about £500 (but i suppose that makes us the idiots, right?:huh:

martinsurrey

TR1 wrote: »

I think you're right and I can see how the costs could add up, but I do believe that they failed to be conservative and allowed costs to inflate - especially as I understand that they had somewhere to stay, It makes it worse that we're claiming for two days off work and just the hotel - so about £500 (but i suppose that makes us the idiots, right?:huh:

They are actually entitled to stay in a property of similar quality and size as the one they were buying.

Them to stay in a travel lodge (or any hotel) when they should be in a big house is not mitigating their losses, its mitigating your costs, mitigating losses means they should do things as efficiently as possible, but they can still try and put themselves in the same position they would have been had the breach not occurred.

Even a room in the Ritz could be cheaper than a short term holiday let on a 5 bed house (of course this means it matters what your buyers where buying).

its a similar situation in the car insurance world, if someone crashes into a new Bentley, the Bentley owner doesn't need to hire a Nissan micra until the claim is sorted, they can hire a Bentley and pass the cost to the at fault parties insurance.

TR1

martinsurrey wrote: »

They are actually entitled to stay in a property of similar quality and size as the one they were buying.

Them to stay in a travel lodge (or any hotel) when they should be in a big house is not mitigating their losses, its mitigating your costs, mitigating losses means they should do things as efficiently as possible, but they can still try and put themselves in the same position they would have been had the breach not occurred.

Even a room in the Ritz could be cheaper than a short term holiday let on a 5 bed house (of course this means it matters what your buyers where buying).

its a similar situation in the car insurance world, if someone crashes into a new Bentley, the Bentley owner doesn't need to hire a Nissan micra until the claim is sorted, they can hire a Bentley and pass the cost to the at fault parties insurance.

I completely understand that - my point is that as they did have somewhere to stay, they could have made things easier - even if they are entitled to house of similar quality/size etc. They were downsizing to a 2-bed cottage and we bought their old 4-bed detached house, yet we stayed in normal/standard hotel room.