Wrong Power of Attorney for house sale

Spiderroo

GDB2222 said:

Just to clarify, OP, were you looking for compensation? 

Have you started looking around for a new purchase, yet?

God no, I don’t think we’re due compensation. This mistake is going to cost us but that seems to be the risk of buying a house. My concern about reporting what’s happened is solely that I feel concerned checks should be thorough early on when it’s a vulnerable person’s home, maybe there could be a simple fix like the agent having a sheet for staff to reference when they get POA sales to check it’s the right one. 

We’ve said we’ll give it one more week of chasing then start viewing other properties whilst keeping our offer in. There’s less coming up than when we found this previous house and it has quite a few features we can’t easily replicate (backs onto a park, near a very good childminder, etc) so we’ve got to weigh that up against other options/cost. Whatever we do next it’ll cost us if we go past January and I doubt we could find something new and complete by then. 

Spiderroo

I also have one adjacent question which may be stupid but I was too young to pay any attention to house buying in the last recession. If we do hold on for the flat at the top to get POS and house prices significantly fall in that time, can we renegotiate on price? The delay is with our seller’s onward purchase not ours and we offered in good faith that it would be a quick sale. 

user1977

Spiderroo said:

I also have one adjacent question which may be stupid but I was too young to pay any attention to house buying in the last recession. If we do hold on for the flat at the top to get POS and house prices significantly fall in that time, can we renegotiate on price? The delay is with our seller’s onward purchase not ours and we offered in good faith that it would be a quick sale. 

You can in theory, but bear in mind the risks and delays if everyone in the chain ends up having to renegotiate their prices as a consequence, get new mortgage offers, etc.

GDB2222

Spiderroo said:

GDB2222 said:

Just to clarify, OP, were you looking for compensation? 

Have you started looking around for a new purchase, yet?

God no, I don’t think we’re due compensation. This mistake is going to cost us but that seems to be the risk of buying a house. My concern about reporting what’s happened is solely that I feel concerned checks should be thorough early on when it’s a vulnerable person’s home, maybe there could be a simple fix like the agent having a sheet for staff to reference when they get POA sales to check it’s the right one. 

We’ve said we’ll give it one more week of chasing then start viewing other properties whilst keeping our offer in. There’s less coming up than when we found this previous house and it has quite a few features we can’t easily replicate (backs onto a park, near a very good childminder, etc) so we’ve got to weigh that up against other options/cost. Whatever we do next it’ll cost us if we go past January and I doubt we could find something new and complete by then. 

That's all fine, it seems to me, except I'd start viewing other properties straight away. This chain may proceed, if you are lucky, but ... 

lisyloo

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

Spiderroo said:

user1977 said:

Spiderroo said:

Beyond this, is there anyone you can flag problems like this to? I feel quite uneasy it’s got this far and the person at the top had no legal right to sell a vulnerable person’s property. I’m not saying they individually are dodgy but I’m surprised there’s no safeguards until it reaches the bit just before everybody exchanges. 

Why do you want to "flag" it to anyone? It sounds like simply a c0ck-up. The safeguards are that the property can't actually be sold - that seems to be working fine.

I think it’s the idea of someone with no relevant permissions inviting people into their home to consider buying it and then engaging solicitors which cost money at the incapacitated person’s expense. 

You’re right. Their estate agent should check they have the right to sell. Checking documents not just taking their word for it (as they could be innocently mistaken).
however as you say it’s harder in a chain.

sorry rather than remarket I’d look for something else assuming you don’t want to wait.

if you have free legal cover on your home insurance it might be worth a call to see if anyone is liable. The issue being that the EA who made the mistake probably has no liability towards you due to the chain.

Nobody is going to be liable to the OP.

Yes, ideally the EA ought to check that their client has POA - and they may have done so, just missed the detail of what sort of POA they had.

I think the main problem is the system in England where the parties don't bring in lawyers until relatively late in proceedings, and then the due diligence is done at a glacial pace - so even fundamental stuff like this can take weeks/months to be spotted.

I’m sure you are right but just for my curiosity can you explain why trying to sell something you aren’t entitled to sell isn’t fraud or misreprentation?

Do you mean as in criminal culpability? As with most crimes, you need criminal intent, and (as far as we know) the attorney here was simply mistaken about the powers that the POA actually granted them. It's no more "fraudulent" than a vendor who didn't realise they didn't have a title to all of their garden.

If you mean some sort of civil liability - for starters, this is about a transaction to which the OP isn't even a party, they just happen to be in the "chain". And I'm not convinced even the buyer in question would have a claim, again given the lack of intent.

Thanks for explaining that.
i appreciate there is a chain and circumstances can change, but I’d expect EAs to check that someone is actually entitled to sell a house.
I guess it can be more complicated with LPAs and COP.

if I move again I will certainly be asking whether people in the chain own the title directly or if there is LPA/COP and have the documents been checked.
i provided a copy of COP application when I sold so I would have expected someone to actually look at it - but maybe we had competent EAs/solicitors.
i know the solicitors did do up front checks as they also asked for a death certificate of one of the joint owners.

but down a chain it can be very hard to find out what’s really going on.

GDB2222

I noticed that the OPG have a 'fast stream' for urgent applications. It might be worth mentioning, but that always assumes that the owner is capable of making a new POA.

lisyloo

GDB2222 said:

I noticed that the OPG have a 'fast stream' for urgent applications. It might be worth mentioning, but that always assumes that the owner is capable of making a new POA.

Open to being educated but I would imagine the fast steam is for e.g. people at risk of harm not for people who desire to move home more quickly.
Worth looking into maybe but again hard from a remote position in the chain.

user1977

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

Spiderroo said:

user1977 said:

Spiderroo said:

Beyond this, is there anyone you can flag problems like this to? I feel quite uneasy it’s got this far and the person at the top had no legal right to sell a vulnerable person’s property. I’m not saying they individually are dodgy but I’m surprised there’s no safeguards until it reaches the bit just before everybody exchanges. 

Why do you want to "flag" it to anyone? It sounds like simply a c0ck-up. The safeguards are that the property can't actually be sold - that seems to be working fine.

I think it’s the idea of someone with no relevant permissions inviting people into their home to consider buying it and then engaging solicitors which cost money at the incapacitated person’s expense. 

You’re right. Their estate agent should check they have the right to sell. Checking documents not just taking their word for it (as they could be innocently mistaken).
however as you say it’s harder in a chain.

sorry rather than remarket I’d look for something else assuming you don’t want to wait.

if you have free legal cover on your home insurance it might be worth a call to see if anyone is liable. The issue being that the EA who made the mistake probably has no liability towards you due to the chain.

Nobody is going to be liable to the OP.

Yes, ideally the EA ought to check that their client has POA - and they may have done so, just missed the detail of what sort of POA they had.

I think the main problem is the system in England where the parties don't bring in lawyers until relatively late in proceedings, and then the due diligence is done at a glacial pace - so even fundamental stuff like this can take weeks/months to be spotted.

I’m sure you are right but just for my curiosity can you explain why trying to sell something you aren’t entitled to sell isn’t fraud or misreprentation?

Do you mean as in criminal culpability? As with most crimes, you need criminal intent, and (as far as we know) the attorney here was simply mistaken about the powers that the POA actually granted them. It's no more "fraudulent" than a vendor who didn't realise they didn't have a title to all of their garden.

If you mean some sort of civil liability - for starters, this is about a transaction to which the OP isn't even a party, they just happen to be in the "chain". And I'm not convinced even the buyer in question would have a claim, again given the lack of intent.

i appreciate there is a chain and circumstances can change, but I’d expect EAs to check that someone is actually entitled to sell a house.
I guess it can be more complicated with LPAs and COP.

The trouble is you eventually reach a position where the EA needs to have their own, independent, legal advice in order to check the titles, POA, etc etc, before they can start marketing. Which might be a good idea, but who ends up paying for all that work, which eventually will be duplicated by the buyers' conveyancers anyway?

lisyloo

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

Spiderroo said:

user1977 said:

Spiderroo said:

Beyond this, is there anyone you can flag problems like this to? I feel quite uneasy it’s got this far and the person at the top had no legal right to sell a vulnerable person’s property. I’m not saying they individually are dodgy but I’m surprised there’s no safeguards until it reaches the bit just before everybody exchanges. 

Why do you want to "flag" it to anyone? It sounds like simply a c0ck-up. The safeguards are that the property can't actually be sold - that seems to be working fine.

I think it’s the idea of someone with no relevant permissions inviting people into their home to consider buying it and then engaging solicitors which cost money at the incapacitated person’s expense. 

You’re right. Their estate agent should check they have the right to sell. Checking documents not just taking their word for it (as they could be innocently mistaken).
however as you say it’s harder in a chain.

sorry rather than remarket I’d look for something else assuming you don’t want to wait.

if you have free legal cover on your home insurance it might be worth a call to see if anyone is liable. The issue being that the EA who made the mistake probably has no liability towards you due to the chain.

Nobody is going to be liable to the OP.

Yes, ideally the EA ought to check that their client has POA - and they may have done so, just missed the detail of what sort of POA they had.

I think the main problem is the system in England where the parties don't bring in lawyers until relatively late in proceedings, and then the due diligence is done at a glacial pace - so even fundamental stuff like this can take weeks/months to be spotted.

I’m sure you are right but just for my curiosity can you explain why trying to sell something you aren’t entitled to sell isn’t fraud or misreprentation?

Do you mean as in criminal culpability? As with most crimes, you need criminal intent, and (as far as we know) the attorney here was simply mistaken about the powers that the POA actually granted them. It's no more "fraudulent" than a vendor who didn't realise they didn't have a title to all of their garden.

If you mean some sort of civil liability - for starters, this is about a transaction to which the OP isn't even a party, they just happen to be in the "chain". And I'm not convinced even the buyer in question would have a claim, again given the lack of intent.

i appreciate there is a chain and circumstances can change, but I’d expect EAs to check that someone is actually entitled to sell a house.
I guess it can be more complicated with LPAs and COP.

The trouble is you eventually reach a position where the EA needs to have their own, independent, legal advice in order to check the titles, POA, etc etc, before they can start marketing. Which might be a good idea, but who ends up paying for all that work, which eventually will be duplicated by the buyers' conveyancers anyway?

My EA asked for a copy of the COP application.
you don’t need legal advice to see who owns a property at the land registry, you need an internet connection and £3.
im not seeing why any of that needs legal advice, but the solicitors that the EA had a good relationship  ship would help I’m sure if it was beyond their ability.
im not seeing the complication of checking documents that requires experts.
there are only 2 options for LPA.
ive not seen one but I’m not imagining is difficult to see which it is.

eventually yes the buyers solicitors will check a property can be sold.

i would imagine EAs cover the expense of vetting buyers and sellers which ultimately is passed onto customers or they risk time wasters who like looking at other people’s houses.

user1977

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

user1977 said:

lisyloo said:

Spiderroo said:

user1977 said:

Spiderroo said:

Beyond this, is there anyone you can flag problems like this to? I feel quite uneasy it’s got this far and the person at the top had no legal right to sell a vulnerable person’s property. I’m not saying they individually are dodgy but I’m surprised there’s no safeguards until it reaches the bit just before everybody exchanges. 

Why do you want to "flag" it to anyone? It sounds like simply a c0ck-up. The safeguards are that the property can't actually be sold - that seems to be working fine.

I think it’s the idea of someone with no relevant permissions inviting people into their home to consider buying it and then engaging solicitors which cost money at the incapacitated person’s expense. 

You’re right. Their estate agent should check they have the right to sell. Checking documents not just taking their word for it (as they could be innocently mistaken).
however as you say it’s harder in a chain.

sorry rather than remarket I’d look for something else assuming you don’t want to wait.

if you have free legal cover on your home insurance it might be worth a call to see if anyone is liable. The issue being that the EA who made the mistake probably has no liability towards you due to the chain.

Nobody is going to be liable to the OP.

Yes, ideally the EA ought to check that their client has POA - and they may have done so, just missed the detail of what sort of POA they had.

I think the main problem is the system in England where the parties don't bring in lawyers until relatively late in proceedings, and then the due diligence is done at a glacial pace - so even fundamental stuff like this can take weeks/months to be spotted.

I’m sure you are right but just for my curiosity can you explain why trying to sell something you aren’t entitled to sell isn’t fraud or misreprentation?

Do you mean as in criminal culpability? As with most crimes, you need criminal intent, and (as far as we know) the attorney here was simply mistaken about the powers that the POA actually granted them. It's no more "fraudulent" than a vendor who didn't realise they didn't have a title to all of their garden.

If you mean some sort of civil liability - for starters, this is about a transaction to which the OP isn't even a party, they just happen to be in the "chain". And I'm not convinced even the buyer in question would have a claim, again given the lack of intent.

i appreciate there is a chain and circumstances can change, but I’d expect EAs to check that someone is actually entitled to sell a house.
I guess it can be more complicated with LPAs and COP.

The trouble is you eventually reach a position where the EA needs to have their own, independent, legal advice in order to check the titles, POA, etc etc, before they can start marketing. Which might be a good idea, but who ends up paying for all that work, which eventually will be duplicated by the buyers' conveyancers anyway?

you don’t need legal advice to see who owns a property at the land registry

Don't you? Look at the number of threads here from people with queries about registered titles (let along the cases involving pending applications, unregistered titles, etc).