Keys not given at time of completion?

elsien

The keys are a side issue. Even if they had the keys, they couldn’t just be letting themselves into the house with tenants in situe anyway. 

What is their solicitor saying about the vacant possession checks? And did they exchange knowing the tenants were still there? 

anselld

If the contract was for vacant posession then the vendors are in breach and will be liable for the cost of eviction and any other consequenses of delay.  Unfortunately they also have the money so the only way to get anything back is through the Courts.

If the contract was not for vacant posession then eviction is their problem and no comeback on vendors.

Silvertabby

I thought it was SOP for solicitors to tell their clients to view the property post tenant move out/ pre completion just in case the tenants had wrecked the place? 

babyblade41

So when your friend went to view the property just before exchange they didn't notice people living there ?

Adezoo

elsien said:

The keys are a side issue. Even if they had the keys, they couldn’t just be letting themselves into the house with tenants in situe anyway. 

What is their solicitor saying about the vacant possession checks? And did they exchange knowing the tenants were still there? 

They were told the tenants had left that’s why they completed. But after they’ve completed  they were told they had to wait extra because tenants are still in. The key is the main issue because they would have had the main keys returned

Adezoo

Silvertabby said:

I thought it was SOP for solicitors to tell their clients to view the property post tenant move out/ pre completion just in case the tenants had wrecked the place? 

Trust me, then in that case it wouldn’t have to proceeded. What if they decided to set the house on fire, why was the check not done from the seller side? 

Adezoo

babyblade41 said:

So when your friend went to view the property just before exchange they didn't notice people living there ?

It doesn’t matter if there are people living in the house or not, if they were told they would leave before completion, then that what should have happened. 

loubel

So they exchanged knowing there were still tenants in but didn't check they had left before completing and did so because the seller lied and said they had gone? 

Clearly completion should not have taken place as the seller wasn't ready to. The seller is in breach of contract by not giving vacant possession (I'm assuming the contract said he would) but this could be complex and lengthy to resolve and your friend needs to instruct a solicitor to pursue this. 

What have they done so far? Is the seller trying to evict the tenants or has he done a runner with the money?

user1977

housebuyer143 said:

user1977 said:

housebuyer143 said:

marcia_ said:

Adezoo said:

user1977 said:

Are they sure the transaction has actually completed? Just because they've paid money to their solicitor doesn't mean completion has happened.

They are the homeowners but since completion day they’ve been waiting for keys. There are tenants inside which were supposed to move but still living in the house. They’ve been told they can’t do much apart from getting a new lawyer

 So probably they are now landlords and need to follow legal guidelines to get the tenants out 

The lawyer has screwed up if they were expecting vacant possession, as the tenants should have been gone before they completed.

Have they? It's not part of the lawyer's job to pop round and check the tenants have actually gone.

Yes, they should be confirming with the other side that they will be providing vacant possession on completion. They should have at s minimum asked their client to check it was empty at exchange or confirmed with the other side that it was.

OP said "before exchanging they were told the tenants have moved out already"

The buyers have a mortgage which requires vacant possession, so to satisfy the lender, they should be ensuring this is the case.

The lender's solicitor can't personally "ensure" it, all they can do is get other parties to tell them what the position on the ground is.

Adezoo

loubel said:

So they exchanged knowing there were still tenants in but didn't check they had left before completing and did so because the seller lied and said they had gone? 

Clearly completion should not have taken place as the seller wasn't ready to. The seller is in breach of contract by not giving vacant possession (I'm assuming the contract said he would) but this could be complex and lengthy to resolve and your friend needs to instruct a solicitor to pursue this. 

What have they done so far? Is the seller trying to evict the tenants or has he done a runner with the money?

They exchanged knowing tenants were ready to leave, they complete after 10 days of original completion day (reminder to complete) and were told the previous tenants have left. But once they completed they “realise” that wasn’t the case. Now a month in they are paying a mortgage for a house that they cannot move in. Their lawyer is useless, doesn’t seem serious. They have given them time to leave but they haven’t