Mid sold property

user1977

Sue04288 said:

This is a lie as the toilet was added during her time in the house.

How and when did you figure that out? Any sign of building regulations approval for its installation?

Thrugelmir

Sue04288 said:

 The annoying part is, she was aware of my husband's mobility problem and how important a downstairs toilet is to us.

The vendor was only interested in selling the preoperty. Your personal lives are of no consequence. This is a business transaction. Onus on due diligence falls on the purchaser. 

Section62

Sue04288 said:

Thanks for your comments. The house is 30 years old, nothing worrying showing up on the survey and the seller had stated on the sales forms that there are no additions to the property. This is a lie as the toilet was added during her time in the house. Can't use a macerator as this too would need to discharge into the rainwater drain. We are looking for compensation from the seller and a solution to the 'illegal toilet ' situation.

This is the bit you need to concentrate on.  If it can be proved the toilet was added during her ownership, and the information you were given was inaccurate (try not to use the word 'lie') then you may have some form of claim against them.

If you'd known the work was done recently then your solicitor should have asked about building regs, the lack of which should have rung alarm bells and - if followed up - may have resulted in doing the drainage survey before buying the property.

Sue04288 said:

We are trying to find out the name of the builder.

Forget about this for now.  You don't have anything to gain from pursuing the builder, other than perhaps confirmation of when the toilet was installed (assuming they are remotely interested in helping you).

canaldumidi

If you add a treatment plant you'd be able to continue to discarge into the brook.

Not ideal, but a bit of lateral thinking. Might be cheaper than the alternatives?

Section62

canaldumidi said:

If you add a treatment plant you'd be able to continue to discarge into the brook.

Not ideal, but a bit of lateral thinking. Might be cheaper than the alternatives?

IIRC the EA won't allow discharge consents if the dwelling is within 'x' metres of a foul sewer, having an existing FS connection (possibly) rules out a separate discharge to (eventually) a watercourse.

There's some technicalities which would need investigating.

TripleH

Was the toilet installed by the previous owner though?

You can argue it wasn't in from the start when the property was built, doesn't mean your seller put it in.

Never use 'lie' better use vague terms as suggested above particularly in legal paperwork. They might not be lying, just incompetent.

Ramouth

Fitting a macerator and pumping the waste to your existing foul drainage shouldn’t be hugely expensive and is likely to be significantly faster and less stressful that trying to get anything from the sellers.  Unless they owned the property from new it is likely to be difficult to prove definitively that they were the owners who had the WC installed.

lincroft1710

Sue04288 said:

We have reported this to our solicitor who seems very reluctant to pursue further action. Any advice would be very welcome.

I wonder why the solicitor seems very reluctant to pursue further action?


It could mean that it comes to light that the solicitor did not act with due regard when dealing with your purchase. Or it could mean you haven't a hope in hell of gaining anything by pursuing the vendor.

Thrugelmir

lincroft1710 said:

Sue04288 said:

We have reported this to our solicitor who seems very reluctant to pursue further action. Any advice would be very welcome.

I wonder why the solicitor seems very reluctant to pursue further action?

Against who?  The vendor should have had the issue rectified when it first came to light. Perhaps they tried and reached a dead end. 

Slinky

How long had the previous owner been in the property? Are there any old documents lurking around on the internet from the previous sale showing or refering to a downstairs toilet?