Sellers solicitor refusing to answer enquiries

MrsBrush

We are (hopefully) close to being in a position to exchange contracts, but have run into a seemingly unresolvable problem.

The sellers solicitor, despite having gained the relevant information from the seller, has flat out refused to answer the legal enquiries that our lender needs answers to before we can proceed any further, as they deem them to be unnecessary to the sale and they have accused my solicitor of holding things up. But, the lender will not release the funds without a couple of the enquiries being satisfactorily answered, so we are at a stalemate. My solicitor has escalated to their senior conveyancer, the EA has been on to sellers estate agents and the conveyancers to try and move things along, the seller has complained to his EA and his conveyancer and asked them to get on with it and 2 weeks later there has still been no movement, and the case handles is now "unavailable". Meanwhile, my sellers and the people at the bottom are increasingly impatient and could have completed in July, so whilst we haven't had the call to say that someone is pulling out, I am fully expecting it if we don't get this resolved soon. 

I think, but obviously cant be sure, that the conveyancing (factory) company in question have over-committed, and because they delayed everything so much at the start of the process are now slowing things down so that completion goes into October - costing everyone the additional £2500 stamp duty. If there is a good reason why they haven't answered, because it is a tricky enquiry to answer that is one thing, but it seems as though it is much more of a "we are too busy, so we will ignore you, stall and generally make things awkward" thing, which is quite another. 

What do we do?

user1977

What are the enquiries in question?

MrsBrush

A couple in particular - there is a covenant on the land, where the original conveyance needs to provide permission for changes to the building - so the garage has been converted with local authority planning permission and a conservatory added under permitted development. The question is whether the original conveyance (which I think is was the developer, who is still in existence, so not hard to find) gave permission for the works, as the covenant seems to suggest that the changes could be rolled back, if permission wasn't given which would obviously affect the value of the property - hence the mortgage company asking for clarity.

Reading between the lines, it looks like a straight yes/no answer would suffice as there is no doubt some kind of indemnity available - but ignoring the questions seems to be the reason for the hold up.

Bookgal88

I feel for you @MrsBrush. My vendor's solicitor got my enquiries back at the start of August, and hasn't responded to them all yet, even though the outstanding ones are very straightforward yes/no questions. No-one seems to be able to get in contact with her (despite both conveyancers working for the same firm), and I'm now starting to really panic that her failure to respond in the last 5 weeks is going to result in me missing the stamp duty deadline. I don't have any advice unfortunately, only commiserations. 

user1977

MrsBrush said:

A couple in particular - there is a covenant on the land, where the original conveyance needs to provide permission for changes to the building - so the garage has been converted with local authority planning permission and a conservatory added under permitted development. The question is whether the original conveyance (which I think is was the developer, who is still in existence, so not hard to find) gave permission for the works, as the covenant seems to suggest that the changes could be rolled back, if permission wasn't given which would obviously affect the value of the property - hence the mortgage company asking for clarity.

Reading between the lines, it looks like a straight yes/no answer would suffice as there is no doubt some kind of indemnity available - but ignoring the questions seems to be the reason for the hold up.

Is it really the lender asking for clarity? Sounds more like the sort of thing the solicitor is trying to clarify so they can advise the lender if there's a problem. Anway, if they're not producing the permission then why not simply assume it doesn't exist and take it from there - indemnities are often obtained where people think the consents actually existed but they just can't find the paperwork to prove it. No point dragging things out for weeks.

Thrugelmir

MrsBrush said:

A couple in particular - there is a covenant on the land, where the original conveyance needs to provide permission for changes to the building - so the garage has been converted with local authority planning permission and a conservatory added under permitted development. The question is whether the original conveyance (which I think is was the developer, who is still in existence, so not hard to find) gave permission for the works, as the covenant seems to suggest that the changes could be rolled back, if permission wasn't given which would obviously affect the value of the property - hence the mortgage company asking for clarity.

Reading between the lines, it looks like a straight yes/no answer would suffice as there is no doubt some kind of indemnity available - but ignoring the questions seems to be the reason for the hold up.

Have the vendors provided their solicitor with this information? 

TBG01

Thrugelmir said:

MrsBrush said:

A couple in particular - there is a covenant on the land, where the original conveyance needs to provide permission for changes to the building - so the garage has been converted with local authority planning permission and a conservatory added under permitted development. The question is whether the original conveyance (which I think is was the developer, who is still in existence, so not hard to find) gave permission for the works, as the covenant seems to suggest that the changes could be rolled back, if permission wasn't given which would obviously affect the value of the property - hence the mortgage company asking for clarity.

Reading between the lines, it looks like a straight yes/no answer would suffice as there is no doubt some kind of indemnity available - but ignoring the questions seems to be the reason for the hold up.

Have the vendors provided their solicitor with this information? 

Or are they now scrambling for retrospective consent?

It's easy to blame the other side and claim the seller has responded, but in a lot of cases their response isn't satisfactory and brings up more investigating.

Would you be happy with taking the seller's word but in a few years time the developer approaches you because they never got consent?

MrsBrush

Yes, apparently the vendor answered all the questions they were asked to, and provided paperwork to them about 10 days ago, and his conveyancers haven't passed them on. It shouldn't be that hard for them to just send the information to my solicitor, especially if they have the answers, regardless if they believe they are necessary or not. Surely it isn't their decision to make.

The vendor wanted to complete next week, so he is trying to get them to just do what they have been paid to do and get the sale through. 

I am really not interested in whose 'fault' it might or might not be, or whether they think it is needed or not, I just want to know what can be done to get them to get on with it.

seradane

Can the seller escalate to management/complaints dept of their solicitors? If they have provided all the information and it's just gotten "stuck" with the seller's solicitor, then hopefully making a commotion will help get the wheels moving again.

GoogleMeNow

I suspect that the seller answered the enquiries, BUT the responses were not satisfactory.

Your solicitor may well have asked for further clarification, such as the seller approaching the developer to obtain Retrospective Consent.  There was probably a clause in the lease/transfer document which required the owner to seek prior consent from the developer before undertaking any works to the property.

How old is the property?

MrsBrush

The covenant is historic, the property is freehold and built in 1971, so not a new build!