Agent misselling property?

leypt1

Hello,
A dilemma posted out of curiosity - any input gratefully received!

We had an offer accepted of £400k on a property advertised online as having a new 150 year lease on completion. Just after having our offer accepted we fired across some routine questions to the estate agent and learned that the property actually has an 87 year lease and the 150 year label was added on by mistake by someone in the agent's office (the vendors were only ever intending to enquire into the price of extension with their freeholder).

We reduced our offer to £394k to take account of the cost of extension, and after a bit of back and forth about whose fault the misunderstanding was, the agents landed on it being a "genuine misunderstanding" and the sellers have agreed to split the difference.

We're debating over whether to proceed - the flat is at the very top of our budget and £403k would be a real stretch. 

However my actual question is around the estate agent's responsibilities - throughout all of this the flat has still been described online as having a 150 year lease. Even now !! Even after the website has been updated to add and then remove a SSTC label!! I'm now inclined to give them less benefit of the doubt

My feeling is that neither the vendors nor we should really be bearing this cost which is essentially down to the agent misselling. Do we have any recourse?

Thanks in advance for any help!

davidmcn

leypt1 said:

My feeling is that neither the vendors nor we should really be bearing this cost which is essentially down to the agent misselling.

What costs? It doesn't sound like you've incurred anything so far.

hazyjo

Absolutely not, the vendor should've checked the details, and you should always confirm things like that through your solicitor, not the EA. The EA will have get-out clauses/disclaimers on those details anyway.

leypt1

davidmcn said:

leypt1 said:

My feeling is that neither the vendors nor we should really be bearing this cost which is essentially down to the agent misselling.

What costs? It doesn't sound like you've incurred anything so far.

We've not no, but the vendors are in a chain and will lose the house they've offered on as a result of this. If we accept their offer they'll have lost £3k and we'll be paying £3k more than we wanted. 

davidmcn

leypt1 said:

davidmcn said:

leypt1 said:

My feeling is that neither the vendors nor we should really be bearing this cost which is essentially down to the agent misselling.

What costs? It doesn't sound like you've incurred anything so far.

We've not no, but the vendors are in a chain and will lose the house they've offered on as a result of this. If we accept their offer they'll have lost £3k and we'll be paying £3k more than we wanted. 

Ok, but you can mitigate your losses by walking away and buying something else. The vendors may have more reason to complain, though I'd normally expect EAs to invite their clients to proofread the information being listed (and even if they don't, the vendors ought to have taken an interest!).

leypt1

davidmcn said:

leypt1 said:

davidmcn said:

leypt1 said:

My feeling is that neither the vendors nor we should really be bearing this cost which is essentially down to the agent misselling.

What costs? It doesn't sound like you've incurred anything so far.

We've not no, but the vendors are in a chain and will lose the house they've offered on as a result of this. If we accept their offer they'll have lost £3k and we'll be paying £3k more than we wanted. 

Ok, but you can mitigate your losses by walking away and buying something else. The vendors may have more reason to complain, though I'd normally expect EAs to invite their clients to proofread the information being listed (and even if they don't, the vendors ought to have taken an interest!).

Agreed, and sadly that's what I think we'll do. Feel bad for the vendors mostly, and annoyed that the estate agent doesn't seem to want to change the information on the website to reflect facts. 
As much as I'd like to see justice served this is mostly out of curiosity- the agents have a very strong hold in the area we're looking to buy in, so will need to keep civil!

Thanks very much for your input 

HampshireH

Surely the ad is irrelevant if your buying it?

Why would they need to update it unless they are still seeking potential buyers?

Its 100% the vendors fault they should have provided accurate info and checked the ad

eddddy

Firstly, do you understand the costs, complexities and potential pitfalls of arranging a lease extension? You might have to pay £2k to £4k in fees (plus the premium) for a statutory lease extension - and unless you follow the correct process, you might have to wait 2 years to do it.

Alternatively, if you decide that you don't want to proceed because the EA gave incorrect information about the lease, if the EA is a member of the Property Ombudsman Scheme (most are), the ombudsman might decide that the EA has to cover any costs you've lost.

numbercruncher8

What the vendors will lose is not really of your concern.

If the flat is at the top of your budget I don't think it makes much sense. The price seems to be £397k with an 87 lease (the reality) versus £400k with a 150 year lease (what you thought you were buying). Essentially you have upped your bid instead of reducing it.

I don't share sympathy for the vendors - why isn't it unreasonable for them to check their own ad to make sure the details were right?

rik111

Are you sure a lease extension is only going to cost you 6k ? As someone else said you will probably have to wait 2 years b3fore extending it, in which time anything could happen. And as for splitting the cost, that is laughable. If I was selling a flat which had incorrect lease details I would have immediately got it amended, there is no way they didn’t notice this. Sounds a bit like bait and switch tactics and you unfortunately have been naive enough to fall for it....

Shambolic2020

They saw a mug walk in