Being pursued for debt after property sale - who is liable: buyer or seller?

Primrose79

I recently sold two freehold cottages that have been in my family for many years.  They are rural cottages that are not connected to mains water, and therefore rely on a neighbouring farmer to provide water from a borehole on his land.  The farmer charges a yearly fee for use of the water in arrears, which is usually produced a few months after the period that was being charged (i.e. if the period was Jan-Dec the bill often did not come until the following May).

The right to the use of this water is detailed in the title of the properties, so there was never any contract between us and the farmer.  The arrangement is, therefore, quite informal, although backed up by the rights detailed in the title.

When we sold the first cottage, we passed all this information onto the buyer’s solicitors during the conveyancing and, as expected, the buyer’s solicitors asked for a retention to cover the water bill for the period that I was owner of the property, which we agreed to.

When we sold the second cottage six months later, however, the second buyer’s solicitors did not ask for any retention.  My solicitor was surprised by this but suggested that they must have somehow missed it.

Now, unfortunately, the owner of the farm has now contacted me directly for payment of the water bill for the second property.  They claim that the billing period was entirely during my ownership and is therefore my liability, despite the fact that they have produced their bill well after the property has been sold.

My solicitors have told me that because there was never any contract between me and the farmer and the only agreement derives from the title documents, that the liability was passed onto the new owner after the sale, regardless of the period that the bill covers.  They have also advised me to definitely not pay the bill as I would potentially be admitting liability for other bills (there are other services that these cottages receive which are ‘off-grid’ and billed in a similar way), and possibly even future repairs.

I contacted the farmer explaining that they needed to send their bill to the current owners, however the farmer has taken this as me shirking responsibility and is now threatening me with small claims court.  He also claims that the land registry still has me as owner, although he was informed of the change of ownership at the time and has referred to ‘the new owners’ in an email to me.  My solicitors have said that the land registry is slow in updating at the moment, especially with ‘complex title issues’ (which this was - the cottages were on a single title under my ownership and had to be split when they were sold separately), and when it is updated it will show that the property has already been sold.

I am basically trying to find out whether my solicitor is correct that liability passed to the new owner upon sale of the property (and that their solicitor has made a mistake in not asking for a retention).  Or is the farmer correct as the ‘billing period’ was under my ownership?  And is the fact that the Land Registry has not been updated at all relevant?

To reiterate:

·        I did not conceal any information during the conveyancing and fully expected the buyer’s solicitor to request a retention to cover these bills (as they did for the first sale), to which I would have happily agreed.

·        This is not a dispute with the new owners of the property.  In fact, I am not sure if they are even aware of this bill, as the farmer has contacted me directly.

·        There is no contract between me and the farmer, but we have paid this bill for many years (when we were owners).

·        It is not so much the cost of this bill that is an issue, but that in accepting liability I may become liable for further bills from both cottages.

Any thoughts on where to go from here would be much appreciated.  I am not sure if the farmer is just being belligerent, or if they have a point.  My solicitors say if they are to get involved in the dispute beyond providing clarity on the conveyancing, then they would have to start charging me.  I am not sure that would be worth it, but I would rather not end up in court over this! 

wilfred30

Regardless of whether the buyer's solicitor failed to ask for a retention or not, it's your bill so I think you should ignore your solicitor and pay up.

NameUnavailable

Why are you questioning your solicitors advice? They have legal training which many of us don't !

sheramber

You accept that the bill is yours for the first cottage so what is the difference for the second one apart from the fact that one solicitor asked for a retainer and one didn't.
The first didn't trust you to pay the bill and the second did.
You didn't have an agreement with the farmer for either so  what it amounts to is you just don't want to pay it.

wilfred30

If the farmer can prove that the bill relates to a period during the OP's ownership, I think there's every chance that he would win if he took the OP to court.

Keswick1uk

If this was a typical utility a bill would be sent to the previous owner up to leaving date and then to the new owner from meter reading when they move in. Even in a typical quarterly charging run used by utility companies,  a change midway just creates two bills.

I'd be interested why your solicitor thinks the utility cost to leaving date isn't down to you to settle, simply because a payment on account wasn't requested. 

And I'd be interested in why you think you don't need to pay for something of a minimal level that you used considering you've just sold two properties.

Keswick1uk

What are the other bills you could be charged for that's causing the worry?

verytired11

Just pay it in full and final settlement of any liabilities incurred during your ownership.   The buyer's solicitor made a mistake, but I don't see harm in rectifying it now. Your solicitor is just covering themselves.

GDB2222

I'm not sure how much the figures are, but I doubt that the amounts are very large. You do need to ensure that the matter is sorted out on a long term basis, but equally there's no point getting into litigation over water that you actually used. It's just ridiculous to end up in court, with three parties involved, over just a few hundred pounds. 

I think your solicitor needs to take a more practical approach to this. It must be possible to offer to settle the bill without accepting responsibility for ongoing payments, and of course that all needs to be confirmed in writing. 

GDB2222

The standard conditions of sale require that service charges are apportioned, and I'm really quite surprised that your solicitor has taken the view that that does not apply. Just be careful that he doesn't drag you into expensive litigation over a theoretical point of law that the judge will have absolutely no sympathy with.

Justonemorecupoftea

Can you get your solicitor to draw something up that says you'll pay this but won't be liable for any of the other stuff?