Anyone had any success in leasehold professional negligence

mfz1

As the title says. Has anyone had any success on owning a leasehold and successfully arguing for professional negligence?
What is the process? I have had a letter from Simpson Millar to get in touch with them to discuss further, however,  after reading their google reviews wondering if there are others fighting this corner as well.

davidmcn

This is a big vague - which professional are you proposing to sue?

sal_III

Are you going after your solicitor for missing to point out onerous lease terms, or the Freeholder?

cattie

As mentioned here, you need to be a bit more specific about the issue/s for anybody to be able to give you an answer.

mfz1

sal_III said:

Are you going after your solicitor for missing to point out onerous lease terms, or the Freeholder?

This one. I hadn't even met my solicitor. I couldn't even speak to her. I spoke to her once after persistent calling. I asked about how I hadn't even heard of a house being leasehold, and i was told, that since it is >900 years plus, its practically a freehold and makes no difference.

davidmcn

mfz1 said:

sal_III said:

Are you going after your solicitor for missing to point out onerous lease terms, or the Freeholder?

i was told, that since it is >900 years plus, its practically a freehold and makes no difference.

That would seem to be accurate advice, assuming there are no onerous covenants (which you could have in a freehold anyway) or significant rents. What's the difficulty in your case?

sal_III

mfz1 said:

sal_III said:

Are you going after your solicitor for missing to point out onerous lease terms, or the Freeholder?

This one. I hadn't even met my solicitor. I couldn't even speak to her. I spoke to her once after persistent calling. I asked about how I hadn't even heard of a house being leasehold, and i was told, that since it is >900 years plus, its practically a freehold and makes no difference.

Let me get this straight, your problem is not a specific term of the lease, but rather that you expected Freehold, but actually bought a Leasehold? 

If that's the case I don't think you have much chance, having signed a blatantly obvious document called "Lease". How do you not notice that? 

Unless the solicitor/conveyancer specifically used the term Freehold in their communications with you. 

steampowered

What are you planning to sue over? Service charges?

VincentVincent

mfz1 said:

sal_III said:

Are you going after your solicitor for missing to point out onerous lease terms, or the Freeholder?

This one. I hadn't even met my solicitor. I couldn't even speak to her. I spoke to her once after persistent calling. I asked about how I hadn't even heard of a house being leasehold, and i was told, that since it is >900 years plus, its practically a freehold and makes no difference.

If you're using an online/distance solicitor like Simpson Millar, the expectation is that the majority of communication will be by email and a lot of the work carried out will be done by the team under the solicitor not the solicitor themselves; they're the lead who sign off and validate the work done. It's not unusual at all to only speak to them rarely, if at all. It's by design.

SensibleSarah

OP - they send this letter to literally everyone who owns a leasehold house, regardless of the type of lease agreement and whether there is a case to answer. I had one a few months ago from them - just touting for business. I wasn't aware my property was leasehold until I was well into the buying process (it only came to light during one of the last searches apparently) and had I known earlier, I would have walked away. I'd spent most of my savings allocated to fees etc by this point and would have needed to wait for several months to save them back - so I decided to proceed anyway after speaking to a few people. However, like yours sounds to be, mine is the 'least offensive' of all the leasehold types (long lease of 900+ years, peppercorn rent that has never been collected in nearly 10 years, freeholder is local council) so even if my solicitor had been negligent somehow, I'd be struggling with what to claim compensation for

davidmcn

VincentVincent said:

mfz1 said:

sal_III said:

Are you going after your solicitor for missing to point out onerous lease terms, or the Freeholder?

This one. I hadn't even met my solicitor. I couldn't even speak to her. I spoke to her once after persistent calling. I asked about how I hadn't even heard of a house being leasehold, and i was told, that since it is >900 years plus, its practically a freehold and makes no difference.

If you're using an online/distance solicitor like Simpson Millar, the expectation is that the majority of communication will be by email and a lot of the work carried out will be done by the team under the solicitor not the solicitor themselves; they're the lead who sign off and validate the work done. It's not unusual at all to only speak to them rarely, if at all. It's by design.

While all that's true, I think the OP was saying that Simpson Millar are the bunch offering to make the claim, not their previous conveyancers.