Retaining wall collapsed whilst viewing!

Davesnave

Scotbot said:

Remember the agent is just the messenger.

I think they might be found to be more than just a 'messenger' if they'd taken or sent the OP to a dangerous location and a serious accident had occurred. As the vendor's representative on-site, they did not conduct an adequate risk assessment.

Scotbot

AW618 said:

Scotbot said:

I assume from your user name you are female and unless you are built like an olympic shot putter you would have to do a damn site more than lean against a wall for it to fall down.  Ignore them, if they follow up say  that you were very surprised by the condition of the property and what happened but as you were not injured you won't be persuing it further.  They won't be taking you to court, they are overseas and won't get anywhere anyhow.  Remember the agent is just the messenger.

Well her claim is that she did lean on it, and it did fall down, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make.  If you mean "you would have to do more than lean against a sound wall for it to fall down", well, yes, but nobody is contesting that it is a sound wall.
If it was clearly an unsound wall and if she went out of her way to put weight on it knowing it to be unsound then I would find it easier to accept  that she has some culpability.  In fact in her original post she appears to accept that it was clearly unsound and she in fact wobbled the wall expressly to find out exactly how unsound it was.  I am not sure that that story absolves her at all.

We agree the wall was unsound.  The OP is not responsible for the condition of the wall the vendor is and it is his or her fault that it was not fit for purpose. Whatever the OP did  (and my point is not that much assuming she is an average sized female ) it is the vendors fault the wall fell down as he or she did not maintain it.

Scotbot

Davesnave said:

Scotbot said:

Remember the agent is just the messenger.

I think they might be found to be more than just a 'messenger' if they'd taken or sent the OP to a dangerous location and a serious accident had occurred. As the vendor's representative on-site, they did not conduct an adequate risk assessment.

True, I was trying to say since it is not their property the agent isn't going to try too hard to follow up. 

Norman_Castle

Mickey666 said:

As for an insurance claim by the owner, I think they'd be lucky with that as it sounds like a case of extreme wear-and-tear, which is unlikely to be covered. 

Insurers would expect properties to be adequately maintained. Ignoring a wall until its unstable wouldn't be covered.

AW618

Scotbot said:

AW618 said:

Scotbot said:

I assume from your user name you are female and unless you are built like an olympic shot putter you would have to do a damn site more than lean against a wall for it to fall down.  Ignore them, if they follow up say  that you were very surprised by the condition of the property and what happened but as you were not injured you won't be persuing it further.  They won't be taking you to court, they are overseas and won't get anywhere anyhow.  Remember the agent is just the messenger.

Well her claim is that she did lean on it, and it did fall down, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make.  If you mean "you would have to do more than lean against a sound wall for it to fall down", well, yes, but nobody is contesting that it is a sound wall.
If it was clearly an unsound wall and if she went out of her way to put weight on it knowing it to be unsound then I would find it easier to accept  that she has some culpability.  In fact in her original post she appears to accept that it was clearly unsound and she in fact wobbled the wall expressly to find out exactly how unsound it was.  I am not sure that that story absolves her at all.

We agree the wall was unsound.  The OP is not responsible for the condition of the wall the vendor is and it is his or her fault that it was not fit for purpose. Whatever the OP did  (and my point is not that much assuming she is an average sized female ) it is the vendors fault the wall fell down as he or she did not maintain it.

No, I don't know that you are right.  If someone knows something is unsound, that introduces a duty of care on them to not do anything that could be done to a sound wall.  If you wobble something to see if it falls over, that in and of itself indicates that it occurred to them that it might fall over.  Why else would they do it?  I am not a lawyer, and I don't know what the law would say, but I don't think you can assume that just because something is unsound you can take no blame for it collapsing if you have gone out of your way to interact with it in a way that you knew might cause that - and in this case, deliberately to see if it did collapse.

Ditzy_Mitzy

But surely, without the structural integrity imparted by good mortar, a wall is simply an arrangement of bricks.  The OP, who thankfully was not injured, hasn't demolished a wall; rather she's knocked a stack of bricks over.  Assuming no damage was caused to the bricks themselves, or any remaining mortar adhering to them, she's done nothing to reduce the value of the erstwhile pile of bricks.  This is an act of accidental rearrangement, rather than one of demolition.  Where's the loss caused to the house owner?  He can stack the bricks back up!

AW618

Ditzy_Mitzy said:

But surely, without the structural integrity imparted by good mortar, a wall is simply an arrangement of bricks.  The OP, who thankfully was not injured, hasn't demolished a wall; rather she's knocked a stack of bricks over.  Assuming no damage was caused to the bricks themselves, or any remaining mortar adhering to them, she's done nothing to reduce the value of the erstwhile pile of bricks.  This is an act of accidental rearrangement, rather than one of demolition.  Where's the loss caused to the house owner?  He can stack the bricks back up!

The amount of loss is of course a completely separate question to the responsibility, and of course replacing a wall on the verge of collapse with a new wall is unreasonable.

eidand

Scotbot said:

AW618 said:

Scotbot said:

I assume from your user name you are female and unless you are built like an olympic shot putter you would have to do a damn site more than lean against a wall for it to fall down.  Ignore them, if they follow up say  that you were very surprised by the condition of the property and what happened but as you were not injured you won't be persuing it further.  They won't be taking you to court, they are overseas and won't get anywhere anyhow.  Remember the agent is just the messenger.

Well her claim is that she did lean on it, and it did fall down, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make.  If you mean "you would have to do more than lean against a sound wall for it to fall down", well, yes, but nobody is contesting that it is a sound wall.
If it was clearly an unsound wall and if she went out of her way to put weight on it knowing it to be unsound then I would find it easier to accept  that she has some culpability.  In fact in her original post she appears to accept that it was clearly unsound and she in fact wobbled the wall expressly to find out exactly how unsound it was.  I am not sure that that story absolves her at all.

We agree the wall was unsound.  The OP is not responsible for the condition of the wall the vendor is and it is his or her fault that it was not fit for purpose. Whatever the OP did  (and my point is not that much assuming she is an average sized female ) it is the vendors fault the wall fell down as he or she did not maintain it.

I am not convinced this is the right way to look at things. Deliberately trying to wobble the wall to see if it will fall is not something one should be doing during a viewing. It's not the viewer's house and they shouldn't behave in a way likely to cause damage. You're there to "view" not push things around. 

SallyDucati

eidand said:

Scotbot said:

AW618 said:

Scotbot said:

I assume from your user name you are female and unless you are built like an olympic shot putter you would have to do a damn site more than lean against a wall for it to fall down.  Ignore them, if they follow up say  that you were very surprised by the condition of the property and what happened but as you were not injured you won't be persuing it further.  They won't be taking you to court, they are overseas and won't get anywhere anyhow.  Remember the agent is just the messenger.

Well her claim is that she did lean on it, and it did fall down, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make.  If you mean "you would have to do more than lean against a sound wall for it to fall down", well, yes, but nobody is contesting that it is a sound wall.
If it was clearly an unsound wall and if she went out of her way to put weight on it knowing it to be unsound then I would find it easier to accept  that she has some culpability.  In fact in her original post she appears to accept that it was clearly unsound and she in fact wobbled the wall expressly to find out exactly how unsound it was.  I am not sure that that story absolves her at all.

We agree the wall was unsound.  The OP is not responsible for the condition of the wall the vendor is and it is his or her fault that it was not fit for purpose. Whatever the OP did  (and my point is not that much assuming she is an average sized female ) it is the vendors fault the wall fell down as he or she did not maintain it.

I am not convinced this is the right way to look at things. Deliberately trying to wobble the wall to see if it will fall is not something one should be doing during a viewing. It's not the viewer's house and they shouldn't behave in a way likely to cause damage. You're there to "view" not push things around. 

But the wall was already damaged, she didn't cause the damage.  I doubt the OP was trying to see if it would fail at that moment, or expected it to do so.  Sounds like it could have given way after a heavy rain fall! 

eidand

SallyDucati said:

eidand said:

Scotbot said:

AW618 said:

Scotbot said:

I assume from your user name you are female and unless you are built like an olympic shot putter you would have to do a damn site more than lean against a wall for it to fall down.  Ignore them, if they follow up say  that you were very surprised by the condition of the property and what happened but as you were not injured you won't be persuing it further.  They won't be taking you to court, they are overseas and won't get anywhere anyhow.  Remember the agent is just the messenger.

Well her claim is that she did lean on it, and it did fall down, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make.  If you mean "you would have to do more than lean against a sound wall for it to fall down", well, yes, but nobody is contesting that it is a sound wall.
If it was clearly an unsound wall and if she went out of her way to put weight on it knowing it to be unsound then I would find it easier to accept  that she has some culpability.  In fact in her original post she appears to accept that it was clearly unsound and she in fact wobbled the wall expressly to find out exactly how unsound it was.  I am not sure that that story absolves her at all.

We agree the wall was unsound.  The OP is not responsible for the condition of the wall the vendor is and it is his or her fault that it was not fit for purpose. Whatever the OP did  (and my point is not that much assuming she is an average sized female ) it is the vendors fault the wall fell down as he or she did not maintain it.

I am not convinced this is the right way to look at things. Deliberately trying to wobble the wall to see if it will fall is not something one should be doing during a viewing. It's not the viewer's house and they shouldn't behave in a way likely to cause damage. You're there to "view" not push things around. 

But the wall was already damaged, she didn't cause the damage.  I doubt the OP was trying to see if it would fail at that moment, or expected it to do so.  Sounds like it could have given way after a heavy rain fall! 

then let the rain do the damage and when it's your house you can push all you want. Until then ... hands off