What to do when you notice movement in your house

comedyseeker123

The owner is also an estate agent

comedyseeker123

Surely the owner would know they had structural movement if the front of the house had the bay window done?

The owner is also an estate agent.

eddddy

Mistral001 wrote: »

A few of points here.

This is going off at a tangent from the original post, but since you ask...

Mistral001 wrote: »

Firstly it might be difficult to prove that the estate agent knew about the subsidence.

Yes - in order to succeed with a complaint you would need evidence.

Mistral001 wrote: »

Secondly, the case that you quoted is a special case between two agents.

Yes - the case as a whole is not relevant to this thread. I quoted a specific comment that the Ombudsman made which makes it clear that if an EA knew about subsidence, they should disclose it to prospective buyers.

Mistral001 wrote: »

Have you come across a case where a potential buyer took a case against their estate agent after they did not tell them about [STRIKE]a fault[/STRIKE] material information they they knew about?

Yes - but to clarify, it's not a case 'disclosing faults', it's a case of 'disclosing material information'.

Here an EA failed to mention details of a previous adverse survey was ordered to pay compensation of £500...

...it was clear that the Agent failed to disclose important information in relation to the adverse findings of the previous survey held on their file. I considered this to constitute ‘material information’ which Mr and Mrs B needed to make an informed transactional decision under the CPRs. I was, therefore, not persuaded that the Agent had acted in accordance with Paragraph 5h of the TPO Code of Practice and pointed out that the Agent’s failure had prevented Mr and Mrs B from making an informed decision as to the type of survey they wished to commission and, thereafter, whether they wished to proceed with the purchase of the property at the agreed price. I supported the complaint and made an award of £500.

Link: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/cpr-s-case-2-damp-descriptions

In this different type of case (not relevant to this thread), the EA failed to disclose material information, and was ordered to pay the buyer £25,000 in compensation.

The agent was instructed to sell a property in a sea-side village. The agent knew that there is a proposal to stop maintenance of the sea wall defences at some point in the future but did not disclose the proposal to the buyers, who purchased unaware of the issue.

<snip>

The appropriate outcome in this case was to make an award which compensated the buyers for the distress, aggravation and inconvenience they have and will continue to suffer in future, mindful of the financial implications of the agent’s non-disclosure.

The Ombudsman made an award of £25,000.

Link: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/annual-report-omission-of-the-truth-shatters-buyers-dream

Mistral001 wrote: »

And thirdly, how big must the fault be before the agent has to disclose it? A little condensation, a leaking gutter, a faulty electrical switch, a retaining wall that is leaning out, woodworm in the attic?

As above, it's not "disclosing faults", it's disclosing "material information".

Essentially, "material information" is anything that you might reasonably expect would influence a prospective buyer.

Ultimately, it would be for the Ombudsman to decide whether something is "material information" - based on the facts of a case.

Mistral001 wrote: »

Again I would get proper professional advice from someone whose fee/commission does not depend on selling the property and not rely on the EA informing you of faults or an Ombudsman's finding in your favour if they fail to do so.

Yes - but that's a completely different point. In simple terms:

• An EA knows that a property has suspected subsidence, but says nothing

• A prospective buyer has their offer accepted, and spends £1k+ on legal fees, surveys, mortgage applications

• The survey says there is suspected subsidence - so the buyer runs a mile

• Had the EA said at the outset that the property had suspected subsidence, the buyer would have run a mile at that point - and not spent £1k+

Mistral001

Thanks for the detailed response eddddy.

Just to be pedantic about the difference between a fault and "material information". I have done surveys on properties where the buyer has pulled out due to to a variety of reasons and some of these reasons are faults discovered by a survey and the fault has been rather minor compared with subsidence and plans not to repair sea defences making the house unsellable.

However, it is interesting to know that the house buyer can get compensation from an estate agent using the Ombudsman in these situations. I wonder if all estate agents are insured against these types of cases.

eddddy

Mistral001 wrote: »

I have done surveys on properties where the buyer has pulled out due to to a variety of reasons and some of these reasons are faults discovered by a survey and the fault has been rather minor compared with subsidence and plans not to repair sea defences making the house unsellable.

If a previous buyer said they were pulling out because of their survey, I think that's probably 'material information'.

But a sensible EA would qualify the information, for example:

"The previous buyer told us they were pulling out because the survey reported a small damp patch under a window and a dripping tap in the kitchen. The seller has now fixed the dripping tap, but you may need to do something about the damp patch.

The seller has asked a builder about the damp patch, and the builder says the cost to fix it will be about £500.....etc.

On that basis, are you still interested in this property?"

comedyseeker123

AFAIK EA have to tell those who will make a financial commitment and are due to loose money must be told why the previous sale fell through.