Seller refusing to pay for the indemnity insurance policy

[Deleted User]

jonnydeppiwish! said:

If you need it, the vendor won’t pay for it, then you have 2 options. Walk away or stump up the £300z

Are you willing to lose the house for £300?

Seems will have to pay for it.

The seller is 96, daughter selling on her behalf and tbh don't have the energy to go back to viewings and offer stage. 

[Deleted User]

Tiglet2 said:

A building regulations indemnity policy would cover you for the boiler - probably less than £100, although a solicitor will probably add on an arrangement fee for obtaining this.  The seller should pay for this, but are you going to pull out if they refuse?

I'm not surprised the vendor's solicitor is refusing to provide a breach of covenant indemnity policy for something that was erected in 1957 and is still in situ.   If it is something your lender insists upon, then it would fall upon you to pay for the same, particularly as it benefits you, not your seller.

First quote was £102 and now about gas saefty now £209 will just pay and move on.

Think the solicitors get a cut of this as well so pointless.

[Deleted User]

macman said:

There is no requirement whatsoever to provide a GSC for a boiler, installed in 2005, and even if they did, it would tell you precisely zero about it's safety or condition in 2022. What would be more useful would be a copy of the invoice for the last service, but, again, there is no requirement to provide this.
There will be no enforcement action in this respect.

Will challenge it with my solicitors about the GSC for boiler, 

They did request service which they said will be done on the 19th July, dont think it was done have not had a copy. 

user1977

Your solicitor does not "need to protect you", they need to advise you about what the risks might be, in order that you can decide whether you think an indemnity policy is an appropriate precaution in the circumstances.

Your mortgage lender will almost certainly not have given any specific instructions about either point, but they'll have general instructions to the solicitors via the UK Lenders Handbook, which in relation to the garage point interestingly says:

"5.11.1You must enquire whether the property has been built, altered or is currently used in breach of a restrictive covenant. We rely on you to check that the covenant is not enforceable. If you are unable to provide an unqualified certificate of title as a result of the risk of enforceability you must ensure (subject to paragraph 5.11.2) that indemnity insurance is in place at completion of our mortgage.

5.11.2 If there is evidence of a breach and, following reasonable enquiries, you are satisfied that the title is good and marketable; you can provide an unqualified certificate of title and the breach has continued for more than 20 years without challenge, then we will not insist on indemnity insurance."

which gives you some idea of what lenders think they ought to be accepting without insurance.

[Deleted User]

user1977 said:

Your solicitor does not "need to protect you", they need to advise you about what the risks might be, in order that you can decide whether you think an indemnity policy is an appropriate precaution in the circumstances.

Your mortgage lender will almost certainly not have given any specific instructions about either point, but they'll have general instructions to the solicitors via the UK Lenders Handbook, which in relation to the garage point interestingly says:

"5.11.1You must enquire whether the property has been built, altered or is currently used in breach of a restrictive covenant. We rely on you to check that the covenant is not enforceable. If you are unable to provide an unqualified certificate of title as a result of the risk of enforceability you must ensure (subject to paragraph 5.11.2) that indemnity insurance is in place at completion of our mortgage.

5.11.2 If there is evidence of a breach and, following reasonable enquiries, you are satisfied that the title is good and marketable; you can provide an unqualified certificate of title and the breach has continued for more than 20 years without challenge, then we will not insist on indemnity insurance."

which gives you some idea of what lenders think they ought to be accepting without insurance.

Makes more sense, a way of charging more i suppose 

Their response today "Unfortunately the sellers are refusing to fund the indemnity insurances required to protect you and your lender from lack of building regulations consent for the boiler and electrics and also the lack of covenant consent for the garage erection.

 As you have a lender we are required to put these in place to be able to proceed.  I enclose the indemnity insurance quote obtained in the sum of £209.04 which will need to be paid on completion in order that I can put these indemnities in place."

The title register has some restrictive covenants but since 1928, I guess for formality the solicitor is pushing this. 

Bendy_House

So your solicitors are claiming that this is 'required' by your lender?! Lawdie - I wonder if that is really the case? If it is, then swallow it. If it ain't - if it's just to 'protect' you - then it's your call, but I wouldn't bother as there isn't a cat-in-hell's chance of BC taking any action against either of these things.

Personally, I'd rather put that £300 towards a new boiler, whenever it's required.

They are certainly using it to cover their own bottoms.

[Deleted User]

Bendy_House said:

So your solicitors are claiming that this is 'required' by your lender?! Lawdie - I wonder if that is really the case? If it is, then swallow it. If it ain't - if it's just to 'protect' you - then it's your call, but I wouldn't bother as there isn't a cat-in-hell's chance of BC taking any action against either of these things.

Personally, I'd rather put that £300 towards a new boiler, whenever it's required.

They are certainly using it to cover their own bottoms.

I also suspect that, it's a pointless cost.
Keeps bringing it up as well. Makes it as though without it would not be able to progress. 

user1977

Bendy_House said:

So your solicitors are claiming that this is 'required' by your lender?! 

What the lender thinks they "require" is determined in the first instance by what the solicitor tells them they ought to require...unless and until somebody challenges the solicitor by pointing out that the lender's standard instructions seem to contain some relevant exceptions...

Tiglet2

OP, you could always tell your solicitor that you have taken a "view" on this request and are advising that you are happy to proceed without the indemnity policies in place.  Neither the solicitor nor the lender should be bothered by a breach over 20 years ago.

Similarly, if the boiler is old and you are intending to replace it in the near future, why be bothered about a Gas Safety Certificate (assume they are asking for the certificate of installation, rather than a service report).  If the seller has offered to get the boiler serviced, your solicitor can obtain a copy of the report from the seller's solicitor.

anselld

Regarding the gas you can order a replacement certificate from Gas Safe ..
https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/gas-safety/gas-safety-certificates-records/building-regulations-certificate/order-replacement-building-regulations-certificate/
... assuming the installation has been notified.

Note that they are talking about the Building Regs Compliance Certificate at installation, not a "Gas Safety Certificate" and yes, Building Regs notification has been a mandatory requirement for all new installations since 2005.