Breach of contract on house purchase

parkrunner

westernpromise wrote: »

So in your claim, assert that the gate was left in a non-working condition owing to the sensor having been deliberately bypassed, as indicated by your guy. If she has a receipt for the works showing otherwise, all she need do is produce it. She has not, so your argument is that she won't because it supports your account. If she waits till the hearing to produce this when she could have done so at any time it won't look good.

I agree with those who say you should pursue this. It's not that the secondhand fixtures are worthless - the issue is that you will have to buy new to replace them all; depending on what you're buying you could be looking at £800 just for the oven; and meanwhile you couldn't cook.

The contract stipulates when vacant possession is to be given. I suspect what happened is that she was too tight to move out the day before and pay for a hotel, which you'd need to if completion is at noon. So instead she figured she wouldn't start moving out until 9am on completion day, and of course it couldn't be done in 3 hours. So she is seeking to dump what should always have been her cost off onto you.

I'd imagine the courts would say that you can only claim like for like, in other words not new for old.

JANSPAM

It's me again!
I've just been reading the MCOL guidance notes. It states that there can only be one claiment. As it will be both my husband and I making the claim, does this mean we will be unable to use MCOL? As all the documents we have, have both our names on them would this stop just one of us making the claim?

Tia.

LandyAndy

Just claim in one name.