Vendor did not disclose subsidence ,can we reclaim costs

thatsinkingfeeling1

Hi,

We have found out that the property we are purchasing has known subsidence. Had we been informed about this at the start of the process we would not have put in an offer. Was the vendor legally obliged to disclose this to us? As they did not do this can we reclaim the costs, solicitor, survey, mortgage incurred so far?

Background
We viewed the property several times and were not informed of any structural issues. During the legal enquiries, the vendor stated in form TA6 that there was minor cracking, the cause of which had been rectified 5 years ago (they did not use the word subsidence). Our structural survey found clear evidence of subsidence and advised that this would have to have been handled correctly (i.e. with work certified by the vendor's insurance company, backed up by documentary proof) in order for the property to be properly insurable moving forwards without punitive premiums and there was also a risk that without this it would not be mortgageable. We have been trying to find out exactly what happened, but the vendor is being evasive, although they do now refer to the issue as subsidence, it is not clear if the insurance company was ever informed.

Questions
If the subsidence was a known issue was the vendor obliged to inform their insurance company at the time and what happens if they did not?

Were they obliged to disclose the subsidence to us prior to our making an offer, and given they did not do this, can we reclaim the costs we have incurred so far? There seems to be contradictory information about this online.

Any help much appreciated, as you can imagine this is a very stressful experience.

Simby

If the survey found subsidence before you purchased then it has done its job. You can now if you or your bank are not satisfied with the work done and paperwork pull out and find another property.

Or alternatively you can proceed and rectify the damage ( you may be able to negotiate for a retention for the cost)

Yes the vendor if they knew of subsistence would have to inform their insurance company but that is between them and their insurance not you.

They did disclose on the TA6 the cracking and as such you made further enquires for documentation of the remediation , if they cannot provide that it is your choice if you go ahead or not.

No you have no claim for your costs.

Doozergirl

You don't have a contract with these people and your survey is there for this express purpose.


I think 'minor cracking, the cause of which has been rectified' is the vendors giving you more than a bit of hint anyway. I'd call that disclosure.

This is our system of buying and your due diligence has worked. It costs money but the purpose is exactly this, giving you the opportunity to investigate further, negotiate or walk away.

Smodlet

Technically, if the EA (assuming there is one) knew about the subsidence, they have a legal duty to inform any potential buyer. In practice, how many EAs would know, let alone speak, the truth if it bit them? I have been told by an EA that, in a situation where they knew of structural movement/subsidence, they would disclose it if asked directly but would not volunteer this information, let alone publish in the property's details as they are supposed to. Caveat emptor, always but never more than when buying property.

What I would do is ask a builder, not a surveyor, to view it with you (we can't all be Doozergirl) and quote for any remedial work needed, then go from there, probably a long way. HTH.

Bluebonnie

Doozergirl is right.

You've had a structural survey.

If your surveyor found evidence of existing subsidence, he should have given you a bit more detail - did he do this? if not, get back to the surveyor and ask him; if he did give you details, there's perhaps an issue to be dealt with. Of course you may decide it's not something you'd want to deal with, and you are free to pull out of this purchase.

Alternatively, your surveyor may have found evidence that past subsidence had been dealt with by underpinning, or by dealing with tree roots, or any other method.

You need to get back to your surveyor to ask these questions - we can't tell from here.

thatsinkingfeeling1

Hi all,
Thank you for your quick replies and advice. There is an estate agent, they have confirmed that they were not informed in advance about the subsidence.
We had a full structural survey and the surveyor advised on the specifics of the subsidence, my query is more about whether this should have been disclosed upfront, had it been we would not have viewed the property and would not have incurred several thousand of pounds of costs.

From my initial research, I found several articles that said that under Consumer Protection Against Unfair Trading Regulations (CPR’s), vendors are obliged ' to inform their estate agent – and any potential buyer - of material information that may affect an average consumer’s transactional decision, not only to buy a property but even “an omission that may affect a potential buyer’s decision to view a property'

Is this not correct?

Smodlet

Yes, it's correct. Is it practiced? Please see my previous post. Is it spherical objects, please see here
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6013804/is-my-vendor-or-real-estate-agent-lying-to-me

How do you prove the EA knew about it? How do you prove the vendor did? Some people are not just swimming but drowning in that Egyptian river...

societys_child

If an historical problem has been rectified, I'm unsure if there'd be anything to tell you.


Did you ask if there were any past problems?

Smodlet

societys_child wrote: »

If an historical problem has been rectified, I'm unsure if there'd be anything to tell you.


Did you ask if there were any past problems?

That is hardly my thread, is it? And, if you read it, you would realise the problems are anything but historical. I disagree that historical problems should not be disclosed. Seriously.

societys_child

Smodlet wrote: »

That is hardly my thread, is it?

No it isn't your thread. Wind your neck in, I wasn't even replying to you.

SmashedAvacado

OP

They don't have to answer any questions that you ask.

If they do answer them, then the have to answer them honestly. I don't see that they have not done this.