Estate agent Misrepresented

arrtu

princeofpounds said:

A reminder that it always makes sense to download the lease title from the land registry for a couple of quid before even making an offer, just to check some of the major terms and the title plan...

I have but theres x3

arrtu

why would the mortgage offer a mortgage after doing a valuation survey if only 60yrs left and their limit is min of 70yrs 

eddddy

Is the EA a member of the Property Ombudsman Scheme - most EAs are?

Did the EA explain why the wrong info was on the web page? For example, did the seller give them incorrect info, or did the EA make a mistake in typing up the details? EAs have a duty to take reasonable steps to make sure the info they provide is correct.

On a number of occasions, the Property Ombudsman has instructed EAs to pay compensation to buyers, when the EAs have provided misleading information, or made misleading omissions.

You could try making a complaint to the Ombudsman - but it really depends on whether the EA made reasonable efforts to check that the lease length they stated was correct.

FWIW, here's some comments from the Ombudsman:

Agents must also take all reasonable steps to make sure that all statements about a property are accurate and not misleading.  All material information must be disclosed and there must be no material omissions which may impact on whether a buyer goes ahead.

The Ombudsman expects an agent to ask questions about the property on various matters, one of which is tenure.  Paragraph 7k of the Code states the information that should be provided for leasehold property, such as the length of the lease, service charge and ground rent.

The buyer was entitled to be provided with full and correct information at the outset but in this case she was not. 

Link: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/annual-report-freehold-vs-leasehold

davidmcn

arrtu said:

why would the mortgage offer a mortgage after doing a valuation survey if only 60yrs left and their limit is min of 70yrs 

Because the valuation (normally) assumes the terms of the lease are mortgageable. The surveyor doesn't read the lease. It's up to the solicitors to check what the terms actually are.

NameUnavailable

I offered on a flat because I was told it had a shared freehold. I've since discovered that it's not - it's owned by a large property developer. I'm deciding whether or not to proceed but I can't do anything about my costs so far.

arrtu

eddddy said:

Is the EA a member of the Property Ombudsman Scheme - most EAs are?

Did the EA explain why the wrong info was on the web page? For example, did the seller give them incorrect info, or did the EA make a mistake in typing up the details? EAs have a duty to take reasonable steps to make sure the info they provide is correct.

On a number of occasions, the Property Ombudsman has instructed EAs to pay compensation to buyers, when the EAs have provided misleading information, or made misleading omissions.

You could try making a complaint to the Ombudsman - but it really depends on whether the EA made reasonable efforts to check that the lease length they stated was correct.

FWIW, here's some comments from the Ombudsman:

Agents must also take all reasonable steps to make sure that all statements about a property are accurate and not misleading.  All material information must be disclosed and there must be no material omissions which may impact on whether a buyer goes ahead.

The Ombudsman expects an agent to ask questions about the property on various matters, one of which is tenure.  Paragraph 7k of the Code states the information that should be provided for leasehold property, such as the length of the lease, service charge and ground rent.

The buyer was entitled to be provided with full and correct information at the outset but in this case she was not. 

Link: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/annual-report-freehold-vs-leasehold

Thats great , that is basically me in a nut shell , they have quoted 999 years in a number of comms and twice on their web page also verbally 3 witnesses ...so will try that if i need to , nothing to loose .. 

arrtu

Again thanks to eddddy ive been reading up and there are a host of succesful claims and examples on misleading  estate agents 

arrtu

NameUnavailable said:

I offered on a flat because I was told it had a shared freehold. I've since discovered that it's not - it's owned by a large property developer. I'm deciding whether or not to proceed but I can't do anything about my costs so far.

You can Ive just read it basically go to Property Ombudsman Scheme if they are not reg on there  then there are a host of others that they will point you in the right direction for ,, see who or what they are registered with 

Doozergirl

Get the vendor to include a 999 lease.  Or at least one decent enough that it won't raise questions by the time you come to sell.  

999 years on one flat would suggest that someone in that building owns the freehold.  It may not even cost much if it's shared.