Undisclosed roof issue on property

joehawkins90

When I moved into my property, everything seemed fine, however about 3 months down the line I got a section 20 works for work that was going to happen. I had not been advised of any of this when I had moved in so was pretty shocked to find this. Turns out that the previous owner knew but never disclosed the fact. Whilst I was buying the flat, there was a change in the management company. The previous management company did not disclose anything in the LPE1 about the roof repair works that needed to be done. I have since found that the new management company had told the ex owner about the issue and they said to him that he needed to tell me and his solicitors about this before the flat sale went through.

ive caught up with the ex owner and is saying how he did not misrepresent the flat and the property at the time despite full well knowing about it. Is this worth Pursuing through the small claims court? I know there wasn’t any section 20 at the time but it was clearly anticipated. He’s also offered a sum ‘without prejudice’ to stop this going to court so he clearly knows he’s in the wrong even if this can’t be said about in court. The offer was 5% of the cost of the repair, the cheek! Any info welcome

thanks
Joe

Alter_ego

What has your solicitor said?

joehawkins90

My solicitor has said that there was no knowledge their side of this happening and his solicitors have said the same thing. He is responding to emails but not really answering any of the questions I’m asking because he knows he’s in the wrong here and I’d assume doesn’t want that to be used against him. Essentially there is a case here, and some legal precedent from what I’ve read, but obviously he will go down the caveat emptor route. It’s a difficult one as he was specifically told to tell me by the management company but hasn’t, but just depends what law is holding it up. That’s why I’m trying every Avenue for others advice if they may have gone through this

user1977

joehawkins90 said:

My solicitor has said that there was no knowledge their side of this happening and his solicitors have said the same thing. He is responding to emails but not really answering any of the questions I’m asking because he knows he’s in the wrong here and I’d assume doesn’t want that to be used against him.

Your solicitor's in the wrong? Why?

I suspect the difficulty here is proving what loss you've suffered. Even if there hadn't been a proposal to carry out the works, you'd still have been buying a property with a roof which needed work done soon.

root

Would it have stopped you proceeding with the purchase?
Surely you would expect this kind of bill to pop up anyway with a flat purchase?

joehawkins90

1977 - I mean the ex owner essentially he is saying he is in the wrong by offering me a token amount of money to not take this through the courts, in my eyes anyway! Innocent people don’t just cough up money if they’re squeaky clean! 

Root - what I would expect a 4k bill for a roof repair 3 months after buying?! Again, he knew about this and the new management company told him about the issue. The new management company are also willing to come to the court hearing as a witness and bring all evidence they have. Personally I think this is well worth the shot at going to court, but always good to open this up to others

joehawkins90

Root - about a month later the flat next to me was bought and the ex owner left money behind. We could’ve come to some sort of agreement on this pre buying. 

AdrianC

joehawkins90 said:

1977 - I mean the ex owner essentially he is saying he is in the wrong by offering me a token amount of money to not take this through the courts, in my eyes anyway! Innocent people don’t just cough up money if they’re squeaky clean! 

Don't be daft.
A token ex-gratia payment is not an acceptance of fault in any way, shape, or form. It's simply "Look, here's some money if you please shut up, go away, and stop bothering me."

Especially when we're talking about £200 against a £4k bill.

joehawkins90

Am I still being daft if I know there’s proof he was told about the issue multiple times before he sold the property, tried to speed up the process of selling after he was sent an email about it or threatened to pull out of the sale and was a director of the RTM and had a directors report about the issue?

lisyloo

Do you have proof the new management company told him. If it's just verbal from them are they prepared to put it in writing? you need to be able to show this proof to the court not just know about it.
Yes I think you have a case and yes I think you should pursue him if you have good enough proof and you think he has the ability to pay.
Do you have any legal cover or free legal helpline on your contents insurance?

Jeepers_Creepers

I think the caveat emptor rule is - carry out due diligence. If you don't know, then ask. If you don't know, then have it surveyed.

Did the seller have to disclose this if not asked? Pretty sure that's a 'no'.

What about if the management company told him to? Well, I suspect that's still a 'no'. What authority does a MC have to tell a leaseholder what to do with seller information? I think that's the question here.

The MC seems willing to support you in this, so 'all' you have to find out is whether the previous flat owner was legally obliged to divulge when 'told' to.

I haven't a scooby if they were. Your solicitor cannot answer than one question? Lawdie.

As Lisy asks, do you have LP on your contents insurance? Phew - good - call them up for advice.