Buyer seeking compensation after completion.

user1977

Bendy_House said:

I question whether this letter actually came from a 'solicitor'

Of course it didn't come from a solicitor. It's from the buyer and has been forwarded by their solicitor. It's written in the first person!

Upcycling_Queen

Tell them to !!!!!! off. These things should have been ironed out before completion. Twits.

[Deleted User]

Don't reply. In 7 days they will either give up straight away, or take legal advice and give up then. Let them pay for legal advice and find out that their points are nonsense. 

Section62

Bendy_House said:

Unlike some advice proffered so far, I would suggest you do reply, so as not to run the slight risk of you 'losing' by default. Ie, even if their 'case' is nonsense, if you are told you need to respond by X date, and you do not do so, then you are in a much weaker position. I suspect, tho', that this ain't a legitimate letter in any case, so only reply if the letter is clearly from a legitimate solicitor....

If the OP has accurately conveyed the content of the letter then they can't lose "by default" (yet).  The letter doesn't state that they are starting proceedings, only that they will "seek further legal advice" if they don't get a response within their unreasonably short* timeframe.

Loss by default might be a risk if you failed to respond to court papers on time, but in this situation there is no need to muddy the waters by replying with anything that could cause complications later.  Wait for them to seek their legal advice and if there is any further correspondence deal with any substantive matters raised at that point.  There is no risk of being in "a much weaker position" by not responding to this letter.

Whether or not the letter is sent by a "legitimate solicitor" is irrelevant - other than if the claimant is attempting to falsely present themselves as a solicitor, and even then it isn't likely to be a big deal.

 

(*It would take a decent solicitor at least 14 days to stop laughing, wipe the tears from their eyes, and be able to start drafting a reply.)

Doozergirl

Section62 said:

Bendy_House said:

Unlike some advice proffered so far, I would suggest you do reply, so as not to run the slight risk of you 'losing' by default. Ie, even if their 'case' is nonsense, if you are told you need to respond by X date, and you do not do so, then you are in a much weaker position. I suspect, tho', that this ain't a legitimate letter in any case, so only reply if the letter is clearly from a legitimate solicitor....

If the OP has accurately conveyed the content of the letter then they can't lose "by default" (yet).  The letter doesn't state that they are starting proceedings, only that they will "seek further legal advice" if they don't get a response within their unreasonably short* timeframe.

Loss by default might be a risk if you failed to respond to court papers on time, but in this situation there is no need to muddy the waters by replying with anything that could cause complications later.  Wait for them to seek their legal advice and if there is any further correspondence deal with any substantive matters raised at that point.  There is no risk of being in "a much weaker position" by not responding to this letter.

Whether or not the letter is sent by a "legitimate solicitor" is irrelevant - other than if the claimant is attempting to falsely present themselves as a solicitor, and even then it isn't likely to be a big deal.

 

(*It would take a decent solicitor at least 14 days to stop laughing, wipe the tears from their eyes, and be able to start drafting a reply.)

I agree.  There is nothing to lose, it's just a letter from the buyer, forwarded by the solicitor. 

Beyond this 'favour' from the solicitor, the buyer will have to pay for advice at £200 odd per hour.   

There is no court claim, that is the only thing worth responding to.  Any further time spent even thinking about this, let alone writing a letter and subsequently entering into an argument, is a complete waste of emotional energy and any reply is an invitation for you to admit wrongdoing.  

I seem to remember receiving something like this from a buyer that had already attempted and failed to gazunder us (and incurred costs from failed completion as a result)   Our solicitor was adamant that we did not reply and indeed, nothing ever happened.   

Do. Not. Reply.  

Titus_Wadd

If there were items belonging to the OP left at the house which their hysterical buyer had to dispose of then the buyer had a duty to allow the vendor to remove them.   This is just a side comment because the situation is an unfortunate moving day mishap.  Had they emailed or phoned to say there was stuff left behind then you could have arranged to dispose of it or collect it, but they didn't do that.

We had a removal firm appraise our stuff but still sent too small a van and charged us extra for a second one (which was probably waiting around the  corner!)

We've had letters like this, dictated to a solicitor from our neighbours in ongoing disputes.  They seem to be working through solicitors' firms willing to do this!  Our solicitor has always replied pointing out that addressing correspondence to us rather than to them is bad form.  Several of these letters were "Letter before action"  The advice we have been given is not to respond ourselves, there's  a risk we'll write something that might help the spurious claim.  Forward the letter to your solicitor but say you are not seeking to respond to the nonsensical claims, if you want to put them in the picture and to keep the letter on file in case any other letters are received.  Do not reply yourself.

Try to put it behind you.  Enjoy your new home.  Make sure your post is redirected by royal mail and never contact them again.  Maybe your old neighbours will let you know how she's fitting in, in a few months!

TripleH

So to sum up, if I've read correctly..

1. You moved out of your old house by the deadline you said you would do?

2. The buyer decided to move in a day earlier than was agreed?

I would hold onto the letter for now but don't respond until you hear anything else from the buyer.

The first port of call would be to review what your contract of exchange stated for when you agreed to vacate the property and check if that was what you agreed with your solicitor.

As above, ignore the fluff etc. Focus on what the contract said and work from there BUT only if you receive a letter stating they intend to take legal action.

They may send another 'frightener' letter if they hear nothing which I would again taken no action on but keep. Only take action if a letter coming from a solicitors is sent.

p00hsticks

TripleH said:

So to sum up, if I've read correctly..

1. You moved out of your old house by the deadline you said you would do?

2. The buyer decided to move in a day earlier than was agreed?

I would hold onto the letter for now but don't respond until you hear anything else from the buyer.

The first port of call would be to review what your contract of exchange stated for when you agreed to vacate the property and check if that was what you agreed with your solicitor.

As above, ignore the fluff etc. Focus on what the contract said and work from there BUT only if you receive a letter stating they intend to take legal action.

They may send another 'frightener' letter if they hear nothing which I would again taken no action on but keep. Only take action if a letter coming from a solicitors is sent.

My interpretation is slightly different

1. The standard 'vacant possession at time of completion' applied. However, due to moving difficulties on the day, as it turns out the OP hadn't actually finished emptying the property of their possessions at the time of completion, and didn't actually fully vacate the property of their possessions until very late on the same day. 

2. Although the buyer had said that they weren't actually moving in until the following day, this wasn't a formal agreement and isn't really a justification / excuse for the OP not being able to give them the vacant possession - afte completion has taken place then it should be up to the buyer as to when and if they decide to occupy the property and they have a right to an empty property.

I have sympathy for both parties in this unfortunate situation. The buyer had gone completely over the top with their letter but I can see that it was incredibly frustrating for them(I've been in a similar situation myself where I ended up helping the sellers pack their stuff on completion day). Hopefully writing it all down like that has enabled them to vent sufficiently.

TripleH

Cheers. I think should there be any further comeback, it's the details of the contract that count.

Agree, I can have sympathy for both parties looking at the relevant facts available.

tooldle

p00hsticks said:

TripleH said:

So to sum up, if I've read correctly..

1. You moved out of your old house by the deadline you said you would do?

2. The buyer decided to move in a day earlier than was agreed?

I would hold onto the letter for now but don't respond until you hear anything else from the buyer.

The first port of call would be to review what your contract of exchange stated for when you agreed to vacate the property and check if that was what you agreed with your solicitor.

As above, ignore the fluff etc. Focus on what the contract said and work from there BUT only if you receive a letter stating they intend to take legal action.

They may send another 'frightener' letter if they hear nothing which I would again taken no action on but keep. Only take action if a letter coming from a solicitors is sent.

My interpretation is slightly different

1. The standard 'vacant possession at time of completion' applied. However, due to moving difficulties on the day, as it turns out the OP hadn't actually finished emptying the property of their possessions at the time of completion, and didn't actually fully vacate the property of their possessions until very late on the same day. 

2. Although the buyer had said that they weren't actually moving in until the following day, this wasn't a formal agreement and isn't really a justification / excuse for the OP not being able to give them the vacant possession - afte completion has taken place then it should be up to the buyer as to when and if they decide to occupy the property and they have a right to an empty property.

I have sympathy for both parties in this unfortunate situation. The buyer had gone completely over the top with their letter but I can see that it was incredibly frustrating for them(I've been in a similar situation myself where I ended up helping the sellers pack their stuff on completion day). Hopefully writing it all down like that has enabled them to vent sufficiently.

I read it the same way. Completion seems to have happened around 1pm when the sellers ‘stuff’ was still in the house. It matters not a jot when the new owner was planning to move in. They become the owner as soon as the seller receives payment. Vacant completion was not given and the seller is at fault.