My solicitor provided false information - please help.

AbsoluteZero

Hello everyone,


Just over a year ago (December 2017) we moved into our first house. When we were in the process of purchasing the property, our Mortgage company would not release the money until our solicitor sent them proof that we had buildings insurance. Our solicitor told us that our "landlord" (it's a lease property) is responsible for the buildings insurance and so she was waiting for them to send her an updated copy of the buildings insurance. Sure enough, she got the updated version, sent it to the mortgage company, and the funds were released. Jobs a good'un, right?



6 months ago we discovered some water damage in our property and proceeded to go about claiming on our insurance. Lo and behold, this information was false. The "landlord" was only responsible for the buildings insurance for the blocks of flats on our estate, not the houses. Our solicitor had sent the mortgage company the document for the flats.


So now we are in a position where we need to claim on the insurance but we don't have any (we do now, but legally this is now an 'existing problem' and so I don't think we can claim on our new policy).


The house is a new build so we are in talks with the NHBC as well since I don't think it's leaky pipework that's the issue so it should be covered. Still, I want to get compensation from the solicitors because we were without buildings insurance for over a year and we've had to fork out some costs ourselves so far (plumbers, etc.). There is also a possibility that it may not be covered by NHBC, in which case we will have to front the entire cost of any repair work.



Can anyone provide any advice on how I should go about making a case against the solicitors? What's a reasonable amount of compensation to ask for? Is there anything I should be doing to make the case more legally sound? Should I wait until the problem has been solved before attempting to claim compensation from the solicitors? Are the solicitors even liable for this? Any help would be greatly appreciated.



I have already contacted the solicitors about the issue and they want me to keep them updated on the costs of any work that needs doing etc. So I think they've realised that they are at fault.


Thanks in advance!
Oscar

davidmcn

What does your lease actually say about responsibility for insurance?
Was it apparent from the insurance schedule the freeholder provided that it didn't cover your property?

[Deleted User]

AbsoluteZero wrote: »

What's a reasonable amount of compensation to ask for?

Disregarding their liability for the moment, you would be after the costs you incur in resolving the problem.

You wouldn't get a bonus payment for not having insurance for a year.

Tom99

Start with a formal complaint to the solicitor saying you are holding them responsible for any loss or costs you incur.

System

"we've had to fork out some costs ourselves so far (plumbers, etc.). "


The building insurance wouldn't have covered any of the cost in rectifying the leak, plumber and materials, it only covers fixing the damage so ceiling replacement, damage to personal items and such like.

Mistral001

Any legal action you take will depend on who informed you that the landlord was responsible for insurance. Was it the estate agent involved in the sale, or the solicitor or the Landlord, or a neighbour or the developer?

Another factor is whether you had sight of the insurance documents before the sale went through

eddddy

Simonr66 wrote: »

"we've had to fork out some costs ourselves so far (plumbers, etc.). "


The building insurance wouldn't have covered any of the cost in rectifying the leak, plumber and materials, it only covers fixing the damage so ceiling replacement, damage to personal items and such like.

Buildings insurance would not provide cover for damage to personal items. (That would be contents insurance, which a landlord/ freeholder would not provide under any circumstances.)

Also, what was the excess on the landlord's policy that was provided? Often it's £500.

In that case, if the cost of repairs is less than £500, they'd be nothing to claim.

AbsoluteZero

Thanks for all your info. I'll try to respond to each below:

What does your lease actually say about responsibility for insurance?
Was it apparent from the insurance schedule the freeholder provided that it didn't cover your property?

The lease says that the owner is responsible for buildings insurance if you live in a house. The insurance document explicitly states the addresses of the properties that are covered by the insurance (all flats).

You wouldn't get a bonus payment for not having insurance for a year.

The cost of buying separate contents and buildings insurance is almost twice as much as buying them together - is it reasonable to ask for the difference in compensation?

Start with a formal complaint to the solicitor saying you are holding them responsible for any loss or costs you incur.

I have already made the complaint over the phone, but I'm guessing you mean I should get this in writing (i.e. a formal letter)

Any legal action you take will depend on who informed you that the landlord was responsible for insurance. Was it the estate agent involved in the sale, or the solicitor or the Landlord, or a neighbour or the developer?

Another factor is whether you had sight of the insurance documents before the sale went through

It was our solicitor that told us that the landlord was responsible for the buildings insurance, and they were the ones that requested the documents from the landlord and passed them onto the mortgage company. She did send us the documents eventually, however this was after sending them onto the mortgage company.

Also, what was the excess on the landlord's policy that was provided? Often it's £500.

The excess is £100 on the cover for the flats. The cost of repair is definitely going to be above this.

TBagpuss

It was our solicitor that told us that the landlord was responsible for the buildings insurance, and they were the ones that requested the documents from the landlord and passed them onto the mortgage company. She did send us the documents eventually, however this was after sending them onto the mortgage company.

Was this before or after the water damage happened?

It does sound as though this is something which ypur solicitor should have noticed, but it sounds as though neither they, nr the lender, did, and that you either didn't read the documents yourself or didn't notice it either.

I do think that you have grounds for a complaint and potentially to ask for compensation to put ypouback in the position you would have ben in had you ben covered - i.e.
cost of the repair work if not covered by NHBC guarantee,
less the excess on the landlord's policy and amount it would have cost you to have bought insurance for the period you were uninsured.

eddddy

AbsoluteZero wrote: »

The excess is £100 on the cover for the flats. The cost of repair is definitely going to be above this.

And also was it caused by a risk covered by the (flats) buildings insurance?

Because you also say:

AbsoluteZero wrote: »

The house is a new build so we are in talks with the NHBC as well since I don't think it's leaky pipework that's the issue so it should be covered.

... which suggests you think it's a building defect. Where is the damp coming from?

Buildings insurance doesn't cover anything resulting from poor workmanship or poor materials.

G_M

Have you checked, and followed, the solicitor's complainst process? It appears not. Do so.

If you were sent the lease, which clearly stated that you wereliable for insurance, the solicior may well have a defense. However, if you have a statement, in writing, from the solicitors stating that the freeholder's insurance will cover you, you may have a valid complaint.

Your claim would be for losses that the insurance would have covered ie
* not personal contents
* not the excess

You may also have to deduct the saving you have made by not paying fo 12 months insurance premium.


So step one is formal complaint in general terms but step two is formulating a sensible amount for which you can claim (which may or may not be worth doing).