Serious building defects after purchase of lease hold flat

ossie48

Hi there

In February 2020 my daughter purchased a flat on a large development of similar type properties (several hundred flats).
Last week she received correspondence (Section 20 Notice of Intention ) from the management company. It transpires that last year (and prior to purchase) building defects were identified in relation to fire / building regulations that date back to its original construction in 2011. 

She has been told that lease owners are being asked to pay up to £10,000 to remedy the faults. She had absolutely no idea about any of this yet it transpires other leaseholders were initially made aware of the findings long before she purchased the flat. During the conveyancing and survey process nothing at all was identified or divulged about this matter to my daughter despite the management company being aware of the issue having had their own surveyors identify the faults in November 2019.

Does she have any legal recourse against the surveyor who acted on her behalf or the sellers for not disclosing this issue to her during the purchasing process ? 

knightstyle

What did the sellers say about this in their property information form  answers?

ossie48

The seller has ticked the No box in relation to 'Disputes and complaints and 'Notices and proposals', the latter relates to any discussions or negotiations which affect the property.  Likewise No to any outstanding 'building control issues'. 

greatcrested

And what did the management pack submitted by the management company show/say?

How did the seller reply to Q5.5 & 6.2 on the TA7?

AdrianC

Do these construction "defects" relate to cladding, by any chance?

ossie48 said:

The seller has ticked the No box in relation to 'Disputes and complaints and 'Notices and proposals', the latter relates to any discussions or negotiations which affect the property.  Likewise No to any outstanding 'building control issues'. 

Which you say were communicated to the freeholder in November 2019.
Is there anything to say these were brought to the attention of the leaseholders - including the vendor - before whenever that form was completed prior to the February 2020 completion of your daughter's purchase?

davidmcn

ossie48 said:

Does she have any legal recourse against the surveyor who acted on her behalf

What did the surveyor say, particularly in relation to any cladding or other fire-related matters?

ossie48

greatcrested said:

And what did the management pack submitted by the management company show/say?

How did the seller reply to Q5.5 & 6.2 on the TA7?

Management pack shows fire Inspection from 2018..nothing supplied relates to these issues.
She doesn't appear to have a TA7 but has a TA6 as well as others TA10 etc.....however its all dated June 2019 !!. my daughter didnt even enquire about the flat until October 2019. Apparently a previous sale fell through. 

ossie48

It would appear residents were notified of the building faults by e mail / letter in November. So the seller would have been aware around the time the offer was made and accepted, if not at the the time then shortly afterwards. Either way several months before contracts were exchanged. Looking at what I have here,  the LPE 1. ground rent confirmation, TA6, Leasehold information form, TA10, sellers pack is all dated (and some of it signed) June / July 2019 which must refer to the previous sale that fell through. 

AdrianC

There's your answer, then. At the time the form was completed, the vendor was not aware. The form is accurate.

Your daughter should probably have insisted on an updated form, but hindsight's sometimes an expensive thing.

ossie48

AdrianC said:

There's your answer, then. At the time the form was completed, the vendor was not aware. The form is accurate.

Your daughter should probably have insisted on an updated form, but hindsight's sometimes an expensive thing.

The form doesn't relate to this sale though ? It relates to a previous sale. 

davidmcn

AdrianC said:

There's your answer, then. At the time the form was completed, the vendor was not aware. The form is accurate.
Your daughter should probably have insisted on an updated form, but hindsight's sometimes an expensive thing.

The vendor should be volunteering any updated information prior to exchange. Like it says in the form: