Should I pay for a boiler service for my buyer?

kalamity52

Hello

I am new to this site and wonder if I can have some opinions please.

I am in the process of selling my Victorian house with an almost Victorian boiler. I bought the house in 2000 and do not know how old the boiler was then and have not had it changed. I have never had a problem with the boiler but the pump stopped working in Year 1 after the heating was left off for about 3 months during Spring/Summer. When the same thing happened in Year 2 I just made sure I put the heating on in the summer months for a few minutes a day and it never happened again. On both these occasions my local plumber came in and sorted it out.

I received an offer on my house in November and today I received a letter from my solicitor advising me that my buyer would like me to get the boiler serviced by a qualified engineer and to provide a certificate. I have done a bit of research and can appoint a firm that will do this for £60.

The question is: should I?

The house does need work doing to it which is reflected in the selling price so I am inclined to go back to my solicitor and so no!

tori.k

Personally if you don't have it annually serviced or if its due for the sake of £60 I would have it done,as your reluctance could run the risk as looking like you already know there is a serious problem with the boiler, if you do have a annual service then you could pass it back to them with the option of paying for a service themselves.

walwyn1978

Have you had the boiler serviced regularly (ie annually) over the last few years?

If yes then no, just show the service log.

If no, then you might want to consider it for £60, just so you can then show it’s working and put minds at ease. ‘It’s the kind of thing buyers will pick up on so if the buyer drops out it will probably come in useful for the next one.

daveyjp

The buyer's solicitor is a fool and it worries me that the claims culture is leading to such advice being given,

You pay the £60, you provide the piece of paper, they move in, they turn the heating on and the boiler explodes.

They go to their solicitor with the piece of paper and want to sue someone.

Who do they sue?

It can't be you, you provided the piece of paper as requested. (if I was asked my mate would do a 'service' and provide a piece or paper for a couple of beers).
Can't be the engineer. He did the work for you, not them.
Only one person left. Who advised them to get you to do the work?

It is down to the buyer to undertake any due diligence before purchase, not the seller. Caveat emptor and all that.

pphillips

It's not your responsibility to prove the boiler works, it's for the buyer to check the boiler (at their own expense) before deciding whether to purchase the property.

tori.k

daveyjp wrote: »

It is down to the buyer to undertake any due diligence before purchase, not the seller. Caveat emptor and all that.

That's exactly what the buyer is doing there due diligence, A service only shows that the boiler was working without fault at that time, Its no different than buying a car with or without a MOT nothings guaranteed but you get more for the car with a MOT than without.
Providing a £60 service if its not yearly done, is a lot cheaper than the possibility of renegotiating a sale price because one is refused and they want half the cost of a new boiler.

Thrugelmir

pphillips wrote: »

It's not your responsibility to prove the boiler works, it's for the buyer to check the boiler (at their own expense) before deciding whether to purchase the property.

For the sake of £60. Surely better to provide buyers with peace of mind. After all selling the house is the objective. I'd walk away myself. As the concern would be what other maintenance issues are lurking. An individuals attitude tells you a lot.

Mr.Generous

What if the service can't be carried out because he finds numerous faults and quotes to put them right? Tell them its not been serviced but can be demonstrated working if they want to arrange a visit.

pphillips

Thrugelmir wrote: »

For the sake of £60. Surely better to provide buyers with peace of mind. After all selling the house is the objective. I'd walk away myself. As the concern would be what other maintenance issues are lurking. An individuals attitude tells you a lot.

Well maybe the seller should just arrange and pay for a survey, provide reports on the condition of the plumbing, sewerage and wiring and perhaps service any other appliances that come with the property to put the buyer at even more ease. Where will it end!

daveyjp

tori.k wrote: »

That's exactly what the buyer is doing there due diligence, A service only shows that the boiler was working without fault at that time, Its no different than buying a car with or without a MOT nothings guaranteed but you get more for the car with a MOT than without.
Providing a £60 service if its not yearly done, is a lot cheaper than the possibility of renegotiating a sale price because one is refused and they want half the cost of a new boiler.

Getting a seller to prove something is working isn't due diligence. Its foolish when buying a house which is the most expensive purchase anyone will make.

Its a lot different to buying a car as when buying a car you have a choice.

Buy from a garage you get a warranty and consumer protection if the car is a dud. Buy from an individual and its down to you.

Buying a second hand house is exactly the same as buying a car from an individual. There is very little comeback if a buyer relies on surveys carried out by the seller.

novelty-socks

I don't think your buyer is being unreasonable to want to know more about the condition of the boiler, but I'm not sure it makes sense for you to pay for it. In their position, I would want to send in my own engineer, to be sure that it's someone properly independent, who I could I trust.

That said, if I was your buyer, I'd be preparing to have to replace the boiler in due course anyway, and likely finding some way to budget for that regardless of the engineer's report. If the boiler is as old as you say, I'd see that as either a necessary replacement or a desirable upgrade.

Ultimately, it's up to you. All said and done, if they seem like an otherwise attractive buyer, I'd probably pay the £60 and be done with it.