Section 20 notice after purchase of flat

AnotherJoe

Your odds of proving that someone received and read an email are, roughly, a big fat zero.

davidwood681

ACG wrote: »

It is not wrong to haggle the price.
It is a bit scummy to do it the day before exchange at a point where everyone is financially invested and likely tied in.

How would you have felt if it were an increasing market and they banged the price up by £10k after you had spent thousands on fees? That is the point people are making.

Congratulations on saving the £10k. Commiserations on being lumbered with £8k.

If you can prove the vendor knew about the works and the costs then you can potentially sue. Although you need to know where they are and if they are coming back to the UK. If you can not find those 2 things out, then you will probably need to knock it on the head.

Exactly :money:

OP, you tried it on and got burnt

teneighty

Shouldn't this information have been in the leasehold information pack?

It sounds to me like the section 20 notice is defective rather than blaming the vendor.

marliepanda

teneighty wrote: »

Shouldn't this information have been in the leasehold information pack?

It sounds to me like the section 20 notice is defective rather than blaming the vendor.

It is mentioned in the OP that the pack did not make any mention of it because it had not been served at that point.

eddddy

I think people are angry that you reduced your offer just before exchange, and it is clouding their advice a little.

The seller should have informed you that the section 20 notice was served before exchange.

It's unusual for legal notices to be served by email. I would guess that the seller previously agreed with the freeholder/managing agent that they would accept notices via email, and provided a valid email address, which they check.

It sounds to me like you might have a valid claim. But it may be a challenge if the seller has moved overseas, and you don't have an address.

I'd guess your solicitor is a conveyancing solicitor, and not interested in getting involved in litigation.

If you write a letter to the seller's solicitor, they might (or might not) forward it to the seller. But even then, there is no guarantee that the seller will reply to you.

teneighty

marliepanda wrote: »

It is mentioned in the OP that the pack did not make any mention of it because it had not been served at that point.

I'm rather rusty on leaseholds but I thought the information pack was supposed to include all planned works up to 5 years ahead.

The fact that the section 20 notice was served 1 week after completion suggests the freeholder must have known the work was planned when they completed the information pack.

So if the information pack was wrong doesn't that make the section 20 notice invalid?

sal_III

eddddy wrote: »

I think people are angry that you reduced your offer just before exchange, and it is clouding their advice a little.

The seller should have informed you that the section 20 notice was served before exchange.

It's unusual for legal notices to be served by email. I would guess that the seller previously agreed with the freeholder/managing agent that they would accept notices via email, and provided a valid email address, which they check.

It sounds to me like you might have a valid claim. But it may be a challenge if the seller has moved overseas, and you don't have an address.

I'd guess your solicitor is a conveyancing solicitor, and not interested in getting involved in litigation.

If you write a letter to the seller's solicitor, they might (or might not) forward it to the seller. But even then, there is no guarantee that the seller will reply to you.

Try proving that the vendor was aware under these circumstances...

This letter we received is a stage 2 notice. Apparently the stage 1 was undisclosed.
We were told that the stage 1 notice was in the form of an email and not a letter, so many tennants didn't receive it are now in shock.

The advice given thus far is not biased, it's objective and realistic. And is backed by the OP's solicitor intimately familiar with the details.

I'm sure that the OP will be able to find a solicitor ready to handle this case and sponge some fees, regardless of whether there is a realistic chance of clawing back something from the Vendor.

A letter to the vendor is absolutely pointless. They might take the effort to reply with "We knew nothing about it, just like half of the other Leaseholders" or simply ignore it. No way in hell for them to 'fess up and pay even if they knew about the S20 notice.

armchaireconomist

So you dropped the price £10k day before exchange.


Now you want to sue them for £8k because of fire proofing works to YOUR property, because they didn't notify you of the stage 1 notice that apparently most of the tenants had never seen?


I'm glad you weren't my buyer.

Marvel1

Could be worse, paid full price as expected and this bill.

parkrunner

teneighty wrote: »

I'm rather rusty on leaseholds but I thought the information pack was supposed to include all planned works up to 5 years ahead.

The fact that the section 20 notice was served 1 week after completion suggests the freeholder must have known the work was planned when they completed the information pack.

So if the information pack was wrong doesn't that make the section 20 notice invalid?

It can be served but not received, especially as served by email.