Estate Agent almost sold us part of a property that wasn't even for sale, what should we do?

eddddy

tooldle said:

I sold fairly recently. My estate agent drafted up the particulars using the information I provided. Our contract stated that I would be asked to check the draft document, hi-light any necessary amendments and sign to approve the final document. The responsibility for an accurate description rested with me as the vendor.

That's not really correct.

The EA has to ask you to check the details - but the EA is expected to be a property professional, who has more experience of property that most sellers.  So they shouldn't just accept what the seller says.

As an example, an EA said a property had off-street parking - presumably because the seller said it had, and the seller probably checked the EA's property details.

But the Property Ombudsman said that a property professional like an estate agent should have seen that the kerb wasn't dropped - so shouldn't have said that. (The EA was ordered to pay 25% of the cost of dropping the kerb.)

See: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/an-undropped-kerb-misleading-action

GDB2222

user1977 said:

GDB2222 said:

user1977 said:

Pixie5740 said:

 It is one of the things I like about the Home Reports in Scotland you already know things like if the loft conversion is hooky and what valuation the mortgage lender will use before you even go and view the property. 

But even a Home Report doesn't involve anybody actually looking at the title deeds. There's a seller's questionnaire, which includes a few title points but only so far as the seller is aware (and often it's clear they don't have a clue). It includes a valuation, but that's just based on whatever the surveyor has assumed. The surveyor might flag up things for a solicitor to look at, like alterations or suspicions about the legal extent of the property, but they're not going to make their own investigations and tell you the answer.

We've had previous threads where people have suggested the estate agents ought to make their own investigations into the extent of the property (or title conditions, or the terms of the lease, or whether their client actually has the right to sell) rather than rely on what they've been told by their client, but nobody's explained how that would operate in practice. Presumably the EA, before marketing, would first need to instruct their own solicitors to give them a title report. Who's paying for that? Is it going to be worthwhile?

Just to play the devil’s advocate for a moment, it’s all very well to say that it is not worth while checking the advertisement details are correct, but there then ought to be some compensation for buyers who lose money because the details turn out to be wrong. 

Compensation from whom though? If the EA, then like I said, they're not going to take on that liability without first carrying out their own checks. Which would add probably a few hundred quid to the process, presumably payable by the vendor?

Presumably, payable by the vendors in some way. On the other hand, this might make the sales process much smoother, by finding the issues before marketing rather than just before exchanging.  Fewer sales falling apart would reduce EA costs.

eddddy

user1977 said:

eddddy said:

user1977 said:

We've had previous threads where people have suggested the estate agents ought to make their own investigations into the extent of the property (or title conditions, or the terms of the lease, or whether their client actually has the right to sell) rather than rely on what they've been told by their client, but nobody's explained how that would operate in practice. Presumably the EA, before marketing, would first need to instruct their own solicitors to give them a title report. Who's paying for that? Is it going to be worthwhile?

For England and Wales, the Property Ombudsman says that EAs should:

In accordance with paragraph 5e, where the title is registered at HM Land Registry, you should seek to obtain title information to verify the tenure of the property.

So that's just a £3 fee to download that info from the LR website for the EA to do a cursory check.. I don't think there's an expectation that the EA does any more than that.

TBH, it might be sensible for the EA to download the title plan for an extra £3 - to check for issues like loft ownership, leased gardens etc. But the Ombudsman doesn't mention that

And that assumes it's a nice straightforward registered title where the answers are obvious. Plenty of previous threads here with genuine dubiety about boundaries, title conditions, title to sell etc. We don't generally expect laypeople to reliably interpret titles - that's why everybody else in the process employs professionals.

Yes - that's correct.

But none of that is a reason for the EA not to do simple, quick, cheap, basic checks at the outset. (That would avoid prospective buyers wasting time viewing unsuitable properties etc.)

If the simple, quick, cheap, basic checks show up no problems - a buyer can go on to pay their solicitor to do in-depth checks.

rexmedorum

MDalgarno said:

...

... we have been advised that the landlord can make use of this loft space and require access at any time. ...

What's the exact wording? I'd never agree to 'access at any time'!

tooldle

eddddy said:

tooldle said:

I sold fairly recently. My estate agent drafted up the particulars using the information I provided. Our contract stated that I would be asked to check the draft document, hi-light any necessary amendments and sign to approve the final document. The responsibility for an accurate description rested with me as the vendor.

That's not really correct.

The EA has to ask you to check the details - but the EA is expected to be a property professional, who has more experience of property that most sellers.  So they shouldn't just accept what the seller says.

As an example, an EA said a property had off-street parking - presumably because the seller said it had, and the seller probably checked the EA's property details.

But the Property Ombudsman said that a property professional like an estate agent should have seen that the kerb wasn't dropped - so shouldn't have said that. (The EA was ordered to pay 25% of the cost of dropping the kerb.)

See: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/an-undropped-kerb-misleading-action

I am simply telling you what my contract said. 

eddddy

tooldle said:

I am simply telling you what my contract said. 

Apologies if I wasn't clear what part of your post I was challenging.

I was challenging this specific comment that you made:

tooldle said:

The responsibility for an accurate description rested with me as the vendor.

That's the part that's not really correct. An estate agent can't use the blanket excuse "I'm not responsible, I was just quoting what the vendor told me".

An estate agent has a duty to make 'reasonable' efforts to check what a seller has told them is correct.

tooldle

eddddy said:

tooldle said:

I am simply telling you what my contract said. 

Apologies if I wasn't clear what part of your post I was challenging.

I was challenging this specific comment that you made:

tooldle said:

The responsibility for an accurate description rested with me as the vendor.

That's the part that's not really correct. An estate agent can't use the blanket excuse "I'm not responsible, I was just quoting what the vendor told me".

An estate agent has a duty to make 'reasonable' efforts to check what a seller has told them is correct.

I see where you are coming from but my contract said as i have stated. I proof read the listing carefully and picked up a number of errors.

NameUnavailable

Well I've had an EA tell me that a property was shared freehold which turned out it wasn't (there was a residents association). I've also seen a property where I was told the driveway and garage went with the property (they didn't, they belonged to next door but the vendor had been allowed to use them) and another where I was told the property had the 2 off road parking spaces which turned out to be on the title of the downstairs maisonette!

I don't think you can take anything as read until you have formal/legal proof.

Some things you can easily check yourself by downloading the info from the land registry (at £3 a time).

steampowered

I don't understand why people are suggesting complaining to the EA.

The only way the EA could have checked who owned the loft would be for them to review the land registry records and the lease for the property. 

EAs cannot be expected to do that. That is the conveyancer's job.

It is a reasonable assumption for an EA to make that the loft inside a property is owned by that property, especially if that is what they have been told by the vendor. 

mrschaucer

We still don't know what the lease ACTUALLY says about right of access ...