Recent house purchase - intentionally misled about garden

Halmor

Hi,

Sorry if this is not the right place for this post, please move if necessary.

We purchased a house around a year ago. A few minor issues were discovered, as is often the case, but nothing major. But now we have come to discover that 5 enormous trees at the foot of the garden - 20m+ - are actually damaged and will need to be removed, at the cost of around £3-4k. Looking back, the trunks to these trees were always obscured behind bamboo, and it now seems this was a deliberate attempt to hide the problem. 

It seems the issue was caused by fire damage, due to previous owners having multiple bonfires by the trees. We have pursued a claim with the surveyors but have been unsuccessful, they are satisfied that they inspected the house properly and trees at the end of the long garden were given just a cursory look-over, which meets their obligations.

Basically, do we just go ahead and stump up (I did that joke by accident but now it will remain) the money, or is there a case for trying to ask the previous owners to pay up? I appreciate this is a case for solicitors but if anybody knowledgeable could save me the time and money of engaging their services it would be much appreciated. 

Bendy_House

I suspect you are stuffed.

Do you have Legal Protection on your house insurance? If so, call them up to ask their opinion, but I suspect they'll confirm you haven't a chance.

No harm in asking, tho'.

Halmor

We did have that but - now, obviously, I realise foolishly - we switched it out for a more basic home insurance. Thanks, though.

youth_leader

So sorry.  Your bamboo is like my seller's strategically placed chair in the bay window to hide the rotten floor.  Do you have a woodburner?  Could you at least use the trees for firewood once it's been seasoned?

Halmor

youth_leader said:

So sorry.  Your bamboo is like my seller's strategically placed chair in the bay window to hide the rotten floor.  Do you have a woodburner?  Could you at least use the trees for firewood once it's been seasoned?

We do have a wood burner! And I am fond of the idea of chopping and using the wood for winters to come. But obviously, I'd rather not. So judging by your past experience, the problem is ours now?

user1977

Did you raise any specific enquiries about the trees? There's no general obligation on vendors to disclose negative things about the property, only not to give misleading answers to your questions.

Halmor

user1977 said:

Did you raise any specific enquiries about the trees? There's no general obligation on vendors to disclose negative things about the property, only not to give misleading answers to your questions.

No, we didn't. The first house we've purchased, in our defence. A lesson learned. 

But it's not that the trees will need to come down for aesthetic reasons, they pose a very real, imminent risk to life. Their concealed trunks were so fire damaged that it hid the fact that they were entirely rotten and can fall at the next strong wind. 

So perhaps you are right, that sellers only need to reply honestly to questions. But to me, with, admittedly, no legal knowledge, the suppressing of such a fact, when a threat to life is posed, does feel like there ought to be some legal recourse. But maybe not. Maybe what was done was dishonest but not illegally so. 

user1977

Halmor said:

user1977 said:

Did you raise any specific enquiries about the trees? There's no general obligation on vendors to disclose negative things about the property, only not to give misleading answers to your questions.

But maybe not. 

Definitely not. 

Tiglet2

I expect this to be a case of buyer beware 'caveat emptor'. 

Your solicitor does not visit the property, but you do.  If you had noticed the damage to the trees when viewing the property, that would have been the time to ask your solicitor to make enquiries.  However, understand that solicitors/conveyancers act in the transfer of the property from A to B, not in the general condition of the property or in the garden.  Fire damaged trees in the garden would not be considered a legal enquiry.

Does any property survey really cover damaged trees/plants unless they are planted so near to the house that they could be a subsidence/heave risk?  

Halmor

Tiglet2 said:

I expect this to be a case of buyer beware 'caveat emptor'. 

Your solicitor does not visit the property, but you do.  If you had noticed the damage to the trees when viewing the property, that would have been the time to ask your solicitor to make enquiries.  However, understand that solicitors/conveyancers act in the transfer of the property from A to B, not in the general condition of the property or in the garden.  Fire damaged trees in the garden would not be considered a legal enquiry.

Does any property survey really cover damaged trees/plants unless they are planted so near to the house that they could be a subsidence/heave risk?  

Thanks.

I did think this was the case, just a bit galling so wanted to exhaust all options first. I will be meticulous in examining trees in the garden on all future house purchases.

Tiglet2

What sort of trees are they?  Oak trees might have TPO’s on them, but Lleylandii won’t.