Defending a misrepresentation claim

TripleH

I don't think a dispute between your neighbour and the developer counts as a dispute

Declaration of disputes are between you and other parties (I believe). You cannot realistically disclose or know full information on a dispute you are not a party to.

Your buyer's solicitors will happily send letters until the cows come home (for a nice fee each time). I would suspect if they were serious, the letters would have a more formal structure by now.

Also why has it taken themselves long to replace the skirting and carpets, they should be chasing a specific amount by now not an approximate sum if things were as bad as they claim?

GDB2222

Mr2018 said:

It was accurate as far as I was concerned.  You can't write war and peace in the box, its only a small box to fill in. I certainly highlighted a flooding incident and would have answered any enquiries on it honestly.

You always have the option of writing “see attached note” in that box, so I don’t think that you can argue that the size of the box prevented you from answering the question. 

However, as long as you were not misleading, you should be okay. 

doodling

Hi,

You said:

Mr2018 said:

[...]

The exact wording I put on the PIF was [ticketed yes to question has the property flooded] "Aug 20 - Road drain blocked by leaves, resulted in surface water / rainfall building up from heavy storm that overwhelmed blocked drain and entered integral garage. Drains have been unblocked since."

This is somewhat different to:

Mr2018 said:

[...]

The Incident:

In Aug 2020 the house suffered from a surface water flood.  The main road at the top of the new estate (which is higher than the estate) flooded due to a blocked drain being unable to handle the amount of water during the storm.  This then overflowed the pavement and ran down the estate, passing through three house down the line of houses before reaching mine.  I suffered minimal damage, with the integral garage (which is approx 6" lower then the main ground floor of the building) getting water in it and some dampness to the ground floor carpets.  I shampooed the carpets and disinfected the garage and made no claim on my insurance.  The neighbouring houses were hit worse and did make claims on their insurance.  In Oct 2020 the same happened following another heavy rain fall, fortunately for me this was during the day and the fire service came and drained the water before it reached my house, but neighbours did experience some more minor flooding again.  The drains were then unblocked and prior to the sale of the house, there were no further incidents while I lived there.

In particular in your description of the incident you state both the house and garage were flooded whilst on the PIF you state that only the garage was flooded.  My view is that the PIF misrepresents what happened.

Whether it would be worth the buyers of your house pursuing this depends on their actual loss.  Without knowing the extent of "some dampness to the ground floor carpets" and whether there was other underlying damage it is difficult to comment on whether it would be worth the neighbours making a claim.  For example, since the flood and sale occurred close to each other, there is the possibility that the skirting boards have warped as they have dried out creating damage which would not have been evident until they owned the place.  I think a claim for £9000 sounds ambitious but I haven't seen the alleged damage.

In my view the claim relating to disputes is bonkers (unless there is some evidence that you had a disagreement with someone (builder / neighbour / etc.) over the blocked drain).

I would personally stop responding until you receive a letter before action.  If you do then I would seek legal advice.

For what its worth, if this went to court then I think that you would have difficulty in convincing a judge that your buyers knew that the ground floor had flooded but arguing about their losses might pay significant dividends.

Mr2018

There was over 9 months between the incident and me moving out and nothing had shown re wrapped skirting board etc.  Their initial letter was around a month after they moved in.  So unlikely for something to have happened in that month after 9 months.  I think what triggered it is they will have met neighbours who had a worse experience and did have carpets/skirting board etc changed as the water had pulled some of the skirting boards away from the wall slightly etc and that has prompted them to need/want to do the same and change all the carpets.  The garage is also an integral garage, so by definition is part of the house. I agree it would be more misleading if it was a separate garage.

I don't know the relevance here, but I did not have any conversations with the buyers prior to collecting the keys, all this was done by the estate agents.  I did fully brief the estate agents on the flood prior to it going on sale.  I understand the importance of the PIF but it is not also the responsibility of the estate agent to cover it? how they market/sell it?

I thought I had put 'via' the garage and so what I wrote in the PIF box doesn't (or was not intended to) sound like it was exclusive to the garage.  Which would then be backed up with estate agents conversations etc.  I am actually unsure if it went inside the living parts of the house, damp carpets suggest yes, but damp not soaking like they've been under water.  Could it be water has soaked up and sideways from the garage through the foundations?

Is there a distinction between me giving every specific bit of information that someone might deem important (how would I know what they think is important) and me informing them of the broader incident (i.e. the flooding) then it is on them to ask anything that is important to them, perhaps like what areas were affected

I have only responded to emails from my conveyancing solicitor who have been forwarding me these letters.  I have not sent any correspondence to the buyers solicitors at all so far.  They have stated on these letters that this is a letter before action and action is threatened on all of them.  So far no action has come and each time it has been another letter.  Are you suggesting I wait until a court letter or is it better to try and stop this before a court letter with letters back?

TBagpuss

I think you do need to be clear about an address for service, as your solicitors probably won't / can't accept service on your behalf and if they don't have an address for you then the risk is that they serve in other way and you don't see it, and they end up with judgment in default.

If you do't want to disclose your address then you'd need to instruct solicitors who can accept service on your behalf .
you could if you like check for any legal cover and refer to your insurers but they may settle on the basis it;s more cost effective than fighting, which may not be in your interest.

I do agree that the wording you used on the PIF could be misleading as it does imply that the only part of the house affected was the garage, which doesn't appear to be the case, whether, as against that it does mean that they had actual notice that there had been flooding so they had every opportunity to seek further information, and presumably they'd viewed the house so knew the layout , and of course if there was any damage, give that the flood was 9 months before you sold, presumably any damage would have been visible on viewing or survey.

I would be inclined to send brief response to state :- 
1. That the fact that there has been flooding to the property was disclosed on the PIF, and they had every opportunity to make any follow up inquiries they wished, via your solicitors or indeed by obtaining their own survey or other inspections

2. That you lived in the property for 9 months following the incident during which time you were not aware of any issues with damp, smells any damage or other issues, and that the property was transferred to them in the condition it was in upon exchange, in accordance with the contract 

3. give them an address for service - 

TBagpuss

Just to add - £9,000 seems pretty steep if all they are alleging is skirting boards and carpets need replacing . Presumably the carpets were not new at the time you sold?

Do you still have photos of the relevant room? 

eddddy

Fwiw, I wouldn't necessarily say that having 'wet carpets' is the same as having a 'flood'.  A 'flood' implies being covered or submerged in water.

Depending on what actually happened, it might be fair to say that the garage flooded, and some water seeped through to make the carpets and skirting board wet. (But the carpets were never covered or submerged with water.)

(I had a serious roof leak which soaked and ruined an area of carpet, and soaked into the skirting board - but I wouldn't describe it as a flood.)



But there's still the question of whether you respond now, or whether you wait to see if they really do take court action.

TripleH

You could wait for a court letter that may never materialise (eg they know their chances are slim, but they're hoping you will crack and give in to their 'toothless threats').

You could respond and this might kill it all off but it might fire them up to pursue. Plus there is always rhe chance you put something in detrimental to you.

Me personally, I'd wait for a court letter and prepare a defence then. I'd get together all the paperwork now in a safe place to use for my response so I'm not scrabbling around in a panic.

I'd also provide my address to avoid them trying something clever and taking a judgement out that I am unaware of and thus couldn't defend.

Reginald74

You wrote in the PIF that water entered the garage but made no mention of the rest of the house, or your actions to remedy this.

I think you have misled them and I am not surprised they have come back to you on it. 

£9k does seem steep but if its a new build the carpet might need replacing throughout to colour match, which would hike the cost.

Sit tight and if you get a LBA get some proper legal advice.

GDB2222

I'm slightly surprised that there's only a claim for £9k. The biggest loss would be a reduction in value of the house, if it's prone to frequent flooding.  The buyers claim 3 floods. Is it possible that two of these have been since their purchase?