We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Keys not given at time of completion?
Comments
-
Adezoo said:
The seller is at fault because they confirmed they left and signed those papers. The tenants might have decided not to leave for all I know.Ath_Wat said:
I was talking about the tenants because you were. You said "But as a previous tenant, I never push my boundaries and if I intend to leave, I do so. The law protects tenants which is good, but some people take the !!!!!! out this."Adezoo said:
Can you read? I’ve said the vendor is at fault, who cares about the tenant? The time they viewed the property the tenants had their stuff ready to live, confirming they would do so. They can change their mind, but I am focusing on the vendor here. Why are you talking about the tenants? The seller went through completion after stalling saying that they have now left, when they didn’t.Ath_Wat said:
You know the vendor lied when they said the tenants had left. We know nothing about the tenants except what the vendor has claimed they have said.Adezoo said:
They can until the court evicts them that’s true. But as a previous tenant, I never push my boundaries and if I intend to leave, I do so. The law protects tenants which is good, but some people take the !!!!!! out this. Good thing they took the lawyer, hopefully they get all the help and compensation for it.Tiglet2 said:Adezoo said:
Yes but in that case they have to be accountable. People wouldn’t have to go to court if people were just honest from the jump. This situation could have been avoided.Ath_Wat said:
Of course they shouldn't, but people do lots of things they shouldn't do. That's why we have courts. But courts can be very slow and very expensive, which is why it is best to check in advance, as far as you can, that people are not going to try and swindle you, especially when spending hundreds of thousands of pounds.Adezoo said:
Yes but in that case we are talking about tenants who know about it, but don’t want to leave. The seller shouldn’t have gone through with it knowing they were still in the house, simple as that. Not even declare it as vacant. You’re basically lying.SusieT said:
It is not a case of the tenants being aware, as legally they did not HAVE to move out.Adezoo said:
I am sure the tenants would have been made aware, I couldn’t possible imagine not knowing the house is up for sale. There would be photo taken, sometimes the for sale sign up etc. That’s what they did, they had to get another solicitor involvedSusieT said:At exchange the date for completion with vacant posession is set - the seller had exchanged knowing that the house would not be vacant since tenants were still there and appear to have had no legal requirement to leave.
If either party do not complete, they are liable for the costs incurred by the other party (and that will go up and down the whole chain if there is one).
The seller of this property was liable for any costs incurred by your friend from the original completion date until the date the property "completed"
As the property was not vacant your friend should have immediately contacted their solicitor/conveyancer to claim from the previous owner as they were in breach of contract and they had not given vacant posession.
Right now, your friend is in deep doodoo, they have a residential mortgage with a tenanted property, they have no contract with the tenant, they have no idea if/when the tenant will leave or what the status is, they cannot evict them as they have no idea what the status is, they have no idea what the condition of the property is as they cannot enter it if it is tenanted - probably a lot more as well.
They urgently need to talk to an experienced solicitor who deals with this sort of thing, as they are currently standing in a minefield with no easy route out.
As an example, I used to have 2 rented properties, 1 I sold tenanted so the buyer was a landlord and the contract passed to them. The other, they gave notice and I had the estate agent round while the tenant was still there for photos, but they did not actively market it until they had left and it was empty even though I was 99% certain they were going (and would have been happy to show viewers aroind). Reason being that I did not want to end up in the situation whereby they give notice and fail to leave. I most certainly would not have exchanged until the house was empty. A tenant can be given notice to leave on say 30 November as the house is for sale, but legally there is nothing to stop them from staying put until they or a court end the tennancy. Your friend does not know what their status is, and needs to urgently seek legal advice.I checked with my friends and they have now taken a lawyer to deal with the situation. I asked for more information and they said they first viewed the house 6 months ago, and the tenants were still in, but moving out. Unless these people are new tenants, I don’t understand how you take 6 months to leave.
If you look on similar threads on here, you will see that tenants can (and do) say whatever they like. The law is on their side if they don't want to leave. The Citizens Advice Bureau will advise tenants who don't want to leave or have nowhere to go, to stay put until the courts decide to evict them and send in the bailiffs. This is the only way the tenants can get help from the Council, as they are then deemed to be homeless. If they leave earlier than this, the Council won't help them. Some tenants are happy to leave because they want to buy their own property or they have somewhere else to go to, or will leave when given a financial incentive to go by their landlord.
The only way to deal with a tenanted property that you want to buy and live in is to wait until the tenants have gone, either voluntarily or because the courts are evicting them, before you exchange and after you've checked they have actually gone (a viewing or drive by). This gives the buyers the protection they need before committing thousands of pounds to the purchase.
Somewhere along the way your friends thought the tenants, stating that they were moving out, was legally agreed when it was nothing of the sort, just some vague reference to moving out at some point in the future. If both sets of solicitors had been aware (it sounds as though they weren't), your friends would not have exchanged, let alone completed.
Now your friends have to seek advice on the next steps to take and it sounds as though they have now instructed a solicitor to assist.
Why are you assuming the vendor did not also lie when they said the tenants intended to leave?
Stop being concerned about what the tenants have done and concentrate on what the vendor has done. That is the person they need to take to court and get compensation from. The tenants are nothing to do with it.
Maybe I can't read very well, but that does appear to me to be criticising the tenants. Does it not to you?What I was responding to, is people saying that the tenants knew nothing about it. Which I would believe if there was no viewing at all. But landlords do tell their tenants when they want to sell a house.
Although your friends viewed the property, the tenants were not part of the transaction as far as the vendor and solicitors are concerned. They are not copied into correspondence and would not know whether the transaction was going ahead, was aborted or even how long it would take. It would be interesting to see what the vendor answered to these questions in the Property Information Form:
11. Occupiers
11.1 Does the seller live at the property?
11.2 Does anyone else, aged 17 or over, live at the property? If No to question 11.2, please continue to section 12 ‘Services’ and do not answer 11.3–11.5 below.
11.3 Please give the full names of any occupiers (other than the sellers) aged 17 or over:
11.4 Are any of the occupiers (other than the sellers), aged 17 or over, tenants or lodgers?
11.5 Is the property being sold with vacant possession? If Yes, have all the occupiers aged 17 or over: (a) agreed to leave prior to completion? (b) agreed to sign the sale contract? If No, please supply other evidence that the property will be vacant on completion.
Your friends will have a copy of this form completed by the vendor. They should check the answers because this is a legal document and there may be some come back if the vendor lied on this form.
The vendor is at fault here, for confirming that the tenants had vacated when they hadn't. But the buyers would have been told to check this out for themselves and it seems they didn't and instead willingly exchanged and completed.
Hope they make some progress with the new solicitor.5 -
UPDATE: the house is vacant as of this week 🙌 their new lawyer sorted them out. Now they can move in ☺️Tiglet2 said:Adezoo said:
The seller is at fault because they confirmed they left and signed those papers. The tenants might have decided not to leave for all I know.Ath_Wat said:
I was talking about the tenants because you were. You said "But as a previous tenant, I never push my boundaries and if I intend to leave, I do so. The law protects tenants which is good, but some people take the !!!!!! out this."Adezoo said:
Can you read? I’ve said the vendor is at fault, who cares about the tenant? The time they viewed the property the tenants had their stuff ready to live, confirming they would do so. They can change their mind, but I am focusing on the vendor here. Why are you talking about the tenants? The seller went through completion after stalling saying that they have now left, when they didn’t.Ath_Wat said:
You know the vendor lied when they said the tenants had left. We know nothing about the tenants except what the vendor has claimed they have said.Adezoo said:
They can until the court evicts them that’s true. But as a previous tenant, I never push my boundaries and if I intend to leave, I do so. The law protects tenants which is good, but some people take the !!!!!! out this. Good thing they took the lawyer, hopefully they get all the help and compensation for it.Tiglet2 said:Adezoo said:
Yes but in that case they have to be accountable. People wouldn’t have to go to court if people were just honest from the jump. This situation could have been avoided.Ath_Wat said:
Of course they shouldn't, but people do lots of things they shouldn't do. That's why we have courts. But courts can be very slow and very expensive, which is why it is best to check in advance, as far as you can, that people are not going to try and swindle you, especially when spending hundreds of thousands of pounds.Adezoo said:
Yes but in that case we are talking about tenants who know about it, but don’t want to leave. The seller shouldn’t have gone through with it knowing they were still in the house, simple as that. Not even declare it as vacant. You’re basically lying.SusieT said:
It is not a case of the tenants being aware, as legally they did not HAVE to move out.Adezoo said:
I am sure the tenants would have been made aware, I couldn’t possible imagine not knowing the house is up for sale. There would be photo taken, sometimes the for sale sign up etc. That’s what they did, they had to get another solicitor involvedSusieT said:At exchange the date for completion with vacant posession is set - the seller had exchanged knowing that the house would not be vacant since tenants were still there and appear to have had no legal requirement to leave.
If either party do not complete, they are liable for the costs incurred by the other party (and that will go up and down the whole chain if there is one).
The seller of this property was liable for any costs incurred by your friend from the original completion date until the date the property "completed"
As the property was not vacant your friend should have immediately contacted their solicitor/conveyancer to claim from the previous owner as they were in breach of contract and they had not given vacant posession.
Right now, your friend is in deep doodoo, they have a residential mortgage with a tenanted property, they have no contract with the tenant, they have no idea if/when the tenant will leave or what the status is, they cannot evict them as they have no idea what the status is, they have no idea what the condition of the property is as they cannot enter it if it is tenanted - probably a lot more as well.
They urgently need to talk to an experienced solicitor who deals with this sort of thing, as they are currently standing in a minefield with no easy route out.
As an example, I used to have 2 rented properties, 1 I sold tenanted so the buyer was a landlord and the contract passed to them. The other, they gave notice and I had the estate agent round while the tenant was still there for photos, but they did not actively market it until they had left and it was empty even though I was 99% certain they were going (and would have been happy to show viewers aroind). Reason being that I did not want to end up in the situation whereby they give notice and fail to leave. I most certainly would not have exchanged until the house was empty. A tenant can be given notice to leave on say 30 November as the house is for sale, but legally there is nothing to stop them from staying put until they or a court end the tennancy. Your friend does not know what their status is, and needs to urgently seek legal advice.I checked with my friends and they have now taken a lawyer to deal with the situation. I asked for more information and they said they first viewed the house 6 months ago, and the tenants were still in, but moving out. Unless these people are new tenants, I don’t understand how you take 6 months to leave.
If you look on similar threads on here, you will see that tenants can (and do) say whatever they like. The law is on their side if they don't want to leave. The Citizens Advice Bureau will advise tenants who don't want to leave or have nowhere to go, to stay put until the courts decide to evict them and send in the bailiffs. This is the only way the tenants can get help from the Council, as they are then deemed to be homeless. If they leave earlier than this, the Council won't help them. Some tenants are happy to leave because they want to buy their own property or they have somewhere else to go to, or will leave when given a financial incentive to go by their landlord.
The only way to deal with a tenanted property that you want to buy and live in is to wait until the tenants have gone, either voluntarily or because the courts are evicting them, before you exchange and after you've checked they have actually gone (a viewing or drive by). This gives the buyers the protection they need before committing thousands of pounds to the purchase.
Somewhere along the way your friends thought the tenants, stating that they were moving out, was legally agreed when it was nothing of the sort, just some vague reference to moving out at some point in the future. If both sets of solicitors had been aware (it sounds as though they weren't), your friends would not have exchanged, let alone completed.
Now your friends have to seek advice on the next steps to take and it sounds as though they have now instructed a solicitor to assist.
Why are you assuming the vendor did not also lie when they said the tenants intended to leave?
Stop being concerned about what the tenants have done and concentrate on what the vendor has done. That is the person they need to take to court and get compensation from. The tenants are nothing to do with it.
Maybe I can't read very well, but that does appear to me to be criticising the tenants. Does it not to you?What I was responding to, is people saying that the tenants knew nothing about it. Which I would believe if there was no viewing at all. But landlords do tell their tenants when they want to sell a house.
Although your friends viewed the property, the tenants were not part of the transaction as far as the vendor and solicitors are concerned. They are not copied into correspondence and would not know whether the transaction was going ahead, was aborted or even how long it would take. It would be interesting to see what the vendor answered to these questions in the Property Information Form:
11. Occupiers
11.1 Does the seller live at the property?
11.2 Does anyone else, aged 17 or over, live at the property? If No to question 11.2, please continue to section 12 ‘Services’ and do not answer 11.3–11.5 below.
11.3 Please give the full names of any occupiers (other than the sellers) aged 17 or over:
11.4 Are any of the occupiers (other than the sellers), aged 17 or over, tenants or lodgers?
11.5 Is the property being sold with vacant possession? If Yes, have all the occupiers aged 17 or over: (a) agreed to leave prior to completion? (b) agreed to sign the sale contract? If No, please supply other evidence that the property will be vacant on completion.
Your friends will have a copy of this form completed by the vendor. They should check the answers because this is a legal document and there may be some come back if the vendor lied on this form.
The vendor is at fault here, for confirming that the tenants had vacated when they hadn't. But the buyers would have been told to check this out for themselves and it seems they didn't and instead willingly exchanged and completed.
Hope they make some progress with the new solicitor.3 -
I suggest that one of the very first things they should do is change the locks
5 -
Definitely will be advising them to do that. I am actually glad they didn’t have to wait months or years. Definitely an experiencep00hsticks said:I suggest that one of the very first things they should do is change the locks1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards