Not my garage

Tiglet2

I was asking OP whether the garage was mentioned when he viewed the property to establish whether or not the garage was ever part of the sale. It doesn't sound like it was. People do split titles and sell off garages and parcels of land and the lease wouldn't show the up to date position of the land being sold. It is the title register and title plan which show the up to date position. OP would have been provided with these documents when he was buying the property and then again, once he had completed the updated title showing him as the registered proprietor. If the previous vendor had sold off the garage, the title should have been updated prior to the sale to the OP. This would be the vendor's solicitor who would do this, not the OP's one.

AnotherJoe

Tiglet2 wrote: »

I was asking OP whether the garage was mentioned when he viewed the property to establish whether or not the garage was ever part of the sale. It doesn't sound like it was. People do split titles and sell off garages and parcels of land and the lease wouldn't show the up to date position of the land being sold. It is the title register and title plan which show the up to date position. OP would have been provided with these documents when he was buying the property and then again, once he had completed the updated title showing him as the registered proprietor. If the previous vendor had sold off the garage, the title should have been updated prior to the sale to the OP. This would be the vendor's solicitor who would do this, not the OP's one.

It became part of the sale when he was told about it and given the lease to it, before exchange

davidmcn

Tiglet2 wrote: »

It is the title register and title plan which show the up to date position.

And it doesn't necessarily follow that everything in the title is being sold anyway. I wonder what the contract said? Or whether the garage was mentioned in any of the enquiries?

Nobbie1967

You make an offer on a house and then pay a solicitor to establish what you are legally buying rather than rely on an estate agents description. You are likely to discover more price sensitive information as the sale goes through from the building survey. Before exchange you consider all the information and either proceed at the original price or make a counter offer.

In this case the OP was mislead by the solicitor into believing that they were buying a house with a garage and would have factored this into the decision to proceed at the original price.

I think the OP is potentially due upto the difference in value of a house with/without garage. However, suing solicitors, or rather their insurance companies is a risky prospect as they tend to go 'all in' to scare you off.

I think a reply asking for the difference in value should be sent and see how they respond. If they offer a decent wedge then settle, otherwise a complaint to the solicitors regulation body seeking compensation would be a good first step and see what they offer.

Tiglet2

During a visit to my solicitors before the sale went through I was informed that there was a row of garages around the corner and one of them was included in the lease of the house and was therefore mine. I’ve bought the property and tried to find more detail on the garage but no one could tell me anything. I finally get informed the garage was not mine as it was released from the lease years ago.

I approached my solicitors who confirmed they did tell me the garage was mine and was even given a lease document where they highlighted which garage was mine.

This is why they've offered compensation, because someone told the OP the wrong information.

It became part of the sale when he was told about it and given the lease to it, before exchange

It was never part of the sale. The OP didn't think he was buying a garage and the sales particulars didn't describe one. OP, can you come back and tell us whether the garage was included in the Lease or leasehold title of the register?.

I too would be interested to note what was in the contract or the enquiries. This doesn't add up.

AnotherJoe

Tiglet2 wrote: »

It was never part of the sale. The OP didn't think he was buying a garage and the sales particulars didn't describe one.

Of course it was part of the sale (as far as he was concerned even if it turned out it wasnt) and of course he thought he was getting it. His words are very clear.

To reiterate what he said, my emphasis in red but no words changed

During a visit to my solicitors before the sale went through I was informed that there was a row of garages around the corner and one of them was included in the lease of the house and was therefore mine. I’ve bought the property and tried to find more detail on the garage but no one could tell me anything. I finally get informed the garage was not mine as it was released from the lease years ago.

I approached my solicitors who confirmed they did tell me the garage was mine and was even given a lease document where they highlighted which garage was mine.

How on earth is it "not part of the sale" given what he was told ? It didnt start out as part of the sale but it became one once he was told it was included before the sale went through.

Tiglet2

"I didn’t know about the garage as it was never on the brochure and was happy to buy before I was informed of the garage."

OP made an offer on the property minus a garage.

"before the sale went through I was informed that there was a row of garages around the corner and one of them was included in the lease of the house and was therefore mine"

Now OP thinks he is getting a garage as the solicitor (or assistant) say it's in the lease of the house.

"I’ve bought the property and tried to find more detail on the garage but no one could tell me anything. I finally get informed the garage was not mine as it was released from the lease years ago"

"I approached my solicitors who confirmed they did tell me the garage was mine and was even given a lease document where they highlighted which garage was mine"

OP is told the garage was released from the lease years ago and therefore does not form part of the sale.

Yes, OP's solicitor appears to have been at fault by first saying it was included and now not included, but OP says he was given a lease document which highlighted the garage - exactly what lease document are we talking about here? If the garage was released from the leasehold title many years ago, then the title register and plan (provided by the seller's solicitors when they sent the draft contracts to the buyer's solicitor) wouldn't have any details of the garage on the title or title plan. However, the original lease is the original lease as at the original date. The solicitor should have reported to OP with all their findings about the property. What does the report say? Until OP comes back and comments, it's hard to say what went wrong.

The solicitor may well be at fault here, but they have to go on paperwork provided by the seller's solicitor in the contract pack and raise their enquiries based on that information.

ThePants999

TuppenceWorth wrote: »

I believe that the solicitor should be held accountable if they were negligent. For what sum? I've no idea...

How about £100?