Advise needed please

hazyjo

ALJones wrote: »

Why shouldn’t they put it right? If I crashed into someone and damaged their car, I would have to pay for the repair through my insurance. It would be me at fault as I caused the damage. It’s the same situation?

No. In that scenario, it would be like you asking them if you could bash into their old banger, you revving up and going wallop, with them then saying they didn't give you permission and want you to pay for all the damage.


For the record, I still think it's a wind-up.

Comms69

ALJones wrote: »

I authorised it under the assurance they would buy the house nor that they would rip it out and do a runner!

Do they have grounds for the harassment? If so I’ll ask about the damage to the police

You did not request or require assurance; that would take the form of a contract; one which a solicitor might draw up, and then exchange it for a near identical copy of the document from the other side - often referred to as 'exchanging' contracts.


You provided them with provably false information. That is fraud, something you could very realistically spend time in prison for.


Similarly now you are (yes making unwanted phone calls and contact is the base definition of harassment; it requires a reasonable person test, that test would be passed.) now harassing them.


Your next step is to make a false statement to the police, thereby perverting the course of justice and perjuring yourself.


3 offences, each of which has custody as an option. Are you really that keen to spend time behind bars?


- more of an academic discussion as I agree with Hazy

G_M

ALJones wrote: »

Not a joke, I wish it was! Then I wouldn’t be in this mess
Thing is - it is a joke. Even if everything you've said is true it's the funniest set of twisted logic I've heard in ages! :rotfl:

Why shouldn’t they put it right?
because you agreed to them doing it?
because you tried to scam them?

If I crashed into someone and damaged their car, I would have to pay for the repair through my insurance. It would be me at fault as I caused the damage. It’s the same situation?
I'm glad you ended that with a '?', suggesting you are not quite sure.....
No. Not even close. They asked your permission to dismantle the kitchen and you agreed. Whereas no one gave you permission to crash into their car!
You even facilitated this by supplying a key....

I need to add they also took down the polystyrene tiles from the ceiling so that needs re-boarding and kitchen needs reboarding and replastering!
Yes -they started the work needed to renovate the kitchem, as agreed

They decided they didn’t want the house so they should put right the damage they’ve caused?!
Not 'damage'. Necessary demolition prior to renovation as agreed.

Surely?!?Surely not.

Had a text today saying they will report us for harassment if we keep ringing and texting them because it’s causing the wife a lot of stress and I have no need to contact them?? Well put my house right then? I’m stressed too.

I suggest you do indeed stop harassing them.

If you insist on pursuing this, send them a proper 'Letter Before Action' and then start a civil claim for damages.

But please - if you do, come back and tell us later how it went.........!

getmore4less

can any one help please

I made an offer on this house it was going to be great, good price we got £20k off but it did need some work but we could make it our own.

Borrowed the keys for a second viewing to check things over before getting a builder in to have a look and quote for some work

When we got there the idiot seller had ripped out the kitchen.

the rest is history.

societys_child

If all this is true, the op is an idiot.


If not true . . .


the op is an idiot.

ALJones

I am an idiot and I won’t be trusting with the next buyers

lincroft1710

ALJones wrote: »

I am an idiot and I won’t be trusting with the next buyers

But let's hope you'll be honest with them about the subsidence issue

Davesnave

ALJones wrote: »

I am an idiot and I won’t be trusting with the next buyers

Trust goes two ways. By hiding the issue with your house, the prospective purchasers involved themselves with it in a way that would not have occurred otherwise.


They're not the right buyers, nor is it likely the price they were prepared to pay is right either, but there will be a price at which your house will sell and a buyer who'll pay it.


You are not entitled to anything more than that. None of us is.

Sibz

ALJones wrote: »

Not a joke, I wish it was! Then I wouldn’t be in this mess

Why shouldn’t they put it right? If I crashed into someone and damaged their car, I would have to pay for the repair through my insurance. It would be me at fault as I caused the damage. It’s the same situation?

.

The only way you could make that situation similar to this one would be if the car they were driving was one you had just sold them that had no brakes - and you had not informed them of this beforehand...

HampshireH

Hilarious.

Your mad. Did you lie on the paperwork where it asks about structural issues?

Without wishing to sound rude, what sensible person allows strangers into a property to renovate it when they don't own it :huh:

If I were them I would do the following;

*check for fraudulant statements on the paperwork

*put in a claim against you for all costs associated with the purchase as a result of you deliberately hiding a major issues

* invite you to see me in court for all my expenses due to you deceit.

Be lucky that they pulled out before they bought. The costs had they have sued you after purchase could have been much worse