Solicitor submitted letter of noncompliance

davidmcn

Putting aside what we don't know about Ireland, most of the above advice still stands i.e. you need to find out whether and to what extent there is currently any problem (and what can be done to fix it), the current solicitor is best-placed to give you advice about it and whether there is a right of recourse against the previous solicitors, and no it doesn't mean your wife gets to keep the bank's money.

Mtk

Of course I understand this. But If several sales fall through due to the fact the paper work is shoddy is this not a demonstrable loss to my wife caused by the solicitor?

davidmcn

Mtk wrote: »

Of course I understand this. But If several sales fall through due to the fact the paper work is shoddy is this not a demonstrable loss to my wife caused by the solicitor?

Possibly. But you're crossing several bridges before you've come to them.

Exodi

Mtk wrote: »

Why does my wife have to honour this loan based on the fact her solicitor decieved her?

Are you seriously asking if you get the keep the your mortgage money because your solicitor didn't inform you first about something (by the end of this thread I didn't even know what day it is.)

Have you applied for retrospective planning application? You could be making a big fuss over nothing here...

sal_III

Mtk wrote: »

Of course I understand this. But If several sales fall through due to the fact the paper work is shoddy is this not a demonstrable loss to my wife caused by the solicitor?

So you have two issues:

1. You want to sell your house but unable to do so because of some shoddy paperwork - Sort out the paperwork, contact your local council or whatever equivalent in Ireland to obtain the necessary planning permission retrospectively if at all possible.

2. You are looking for someone to blame and you are fixated on the solicitor who handled the sale - this is best handled by talking to another solicitor about your options

wesleyad

I'm confused about the part with the developer... if you bought the house from new, then surely it was yourselves that added the attic extension (when was this done)? So why is the initial solicitor and developer involved?

sal_III

wesleyad wrote: »

I'm confused about the part with the developer... if you bought the house from new, then surely it was yourselves that added the attic extension (when was this done)? So why is the initial solicitor and developer involved?

I read it, that the original planning permission obtained by the developer was missing the attic extension. The developer built it and sold it with the "extension" in place without revising the planning permissions.

mjdh1957

As you are in Ireland, you should post your problem on an Irish site. Most people here are in the UK and will have limited knowledge of laws and procedures in the Republic.

The nearest equivalent site in Ireland to this one that I have found is

https://www.askaboutmoney.com/

wesleyad

sal_III wrote: »

I read it, that the original planning permission obtained by the developer was missing the attic extension. The developer built it and sold it with the "extension" in place without revising the planning permissions.

I think you might be right, it's an odd way to describe it, something built with the house really is, by definition, not an extension surely.

Mtk

You are right. That's exactly what happened.