Asbestos roof!

Rosieandjim

Did you have it in writing from someone qualified to determine if the roof was asbestos? I would not have paid for the roof without this. Talk to a solicitor who does no win no fee and see if you have some redress

Tom99

Is there more than one type of asbestos cement garage roofing, one more dangerous than the other?

AnotherJoe

Rosieandjim wrote: »

Did you have it in writing from someone qualified to determine if the roof was asbestos? I would not have paid for the roof without this. Talk to a solicitor who does no win no fee and see if you have some redress

Why on earth would you have paid with it?

Once the house is sold, thats it. This happened after selling, not before !

benbay001

AdrianC wrote: »

Oh, it's about the _principle_...?

Right, then definitely abandon all rationality and sense of proportion. Persecute them! All the way to the Supreme Court! The European Court of Human Rights!

It'll cost you years of your life, hundreds of thousands of pounds, probably your marriage and sanity... BUT IT'S THE PRINCIPLE!

I don't understand your sarcastic tone.
If I was the OP I would definitely be following the small claims route. OP acted honestly and with good intentions and the new owners abused those good intentions to make a quick buck.
Id definitely take the time to attempt to get some of the money back off them.
At the very least its worth a threatening letter


Edit: Definition of fraud "Wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."
Claiming youre worried about your pregnant wifes health to get money which then isn't used for its intended purpose is definitely fraud in my opinion.

AdrianC

benbay001 wrote: »

At the very least its worth a threatening letter

Well, a single baseless stroppogram certainly worked the other way round...

davidmcn

Rosieandjim wrote: »

Talk to a solicitor who does no win no fee and see if you have some redress

"No win no fee" is only available for a limited range of cases (generally the ones where you're likely to win something), not for any old rubbish.

And I've no idea why people think there's a claim here - you can't settle a claim and then just decide to have second thoughts about it. There's no obligation on the buyers to spend the money on doing anything with the roof, far less to do it immediately.

Mickygg

You don't have a leg to stand on! You agreed money for the roof. This happens all the time in selling houses agreeing money towards new boiler, damp etc. If they chose to not do the roof, so what.

I find it quite sad that several years on this is being raised as a serious query. In my last sale I agreed £1k towards a new boiler. Am I going to check if they spent this? Of course not. 2 years later do I care? Nope.

Even if you did get somewhere which you won't what would be the outcome? They would only pay to do the roof anyway as I would bet a lot of money they would rather do this than give back to nosey Parker.

Davesnave

Jofisher wrote: »

MAybe but it’s the principal. The stress and hassle they caused us and we truly didn’t realise the roof was asbestos and then not to do anything at all. The lady was pregnant at the time and was claiming it was a health risk. It just makes me angry.

You should be angry with your solicitor then, because they did not protect you from a totally spurious claim.


Neither solicitors or home owners are expected to be experts in materials science, but a solicitor should know when to tell mischievous claimants to go and do one, in polite language of course!


These people had all the time necessary to have their own survey prior to buying. Raising questions long after purchase cannot make you legally liable for the answers you might give, regardless of what is said.

eddddy

Jofisher wrote: »

They went through a solicitor.

Jofisher wrote: »

MAybe but it’s the principal. The stress and hassle they caused us and we truly didn’t realise the roof was asbestos and then not to do anything at all. The lady was pregnant at the time and was claiming it was a health risk. It just makes me angry.

For future reference... just because a solicitor writes a letter saying you have to pay somebody, it doesn't mean you do.


A few years ago, my solicitor offered to send a 'scary' letter to somebody saying that they owed me over £10,000. (They didn't owe it - it was a negotiating tactic in a dispute.)

If you were using your own solicitor, I'm surprised he/she didn't tell you to just ignore the letter.

lincroft1710

For the avoidance of doubt, the correct response to such a request for money after a sale has been completed is :

"I would refer to the reply given in the case of Arkell v Pressdram"