Legal advice [House purchase]

sourfn2

Hello,
I wanted to seek advice or just a second opinion on a matter I'm currently going through.

I purchased a 2 year old property back in October 2021 which was lived in for 1 year buy the original owner.
My personal situation required me to find a property with haste and I wanted to get it before the stamp duty went back up as well. NOTE: This was my first time buying a property (I'm on my own)

During the sale, the previous owner kept pestering the estate agents to chase me directly as he is wanted to be out asap and beat the stamp duty on the property he was buying.
This lead me to skip the house survey (big mistake I know) but my rational was it has a 10 year warranty and looked fine on viewings.

2 months after moving in both the main pitched roof and flat roof above the kitchen failed and let rain flood the house in multiple areas.
Insurance company came out and refused the claim due to 'poor craftsmanship'. I had the roof surveyed by a specialist and he said the materials used meant the whole thing was unsalvageable and needed replacing including the skylight.

I then contacted the warranty company who sent out their own specialist who also mentioned poor design and wondered how it even got signed off.
After 6 months of going back n forth, they agreed to payout £18.5k to cover the replacement of the main roof (I chose my own roofer).
However, they REFUSED to cover the flat roof as there's a line of text in the 20 page warranty document which mentions the flat roof is not covered unless it's got an appropriate insurance backed guarantee.
I didn't pick up on this and nor did my conveyancers.

I accepted the payout and had the roof repaired to a high standard and spent £10k out of my own pocket for them to fix/replace the flat roof at the same time.

I sent a detailed letter to the developers explaining the situation and offered them a chance to discuss the matter and hopefully resolve the matter without the need for legal action. I sent it via recorded delivery and it was signed for by the company owner, but I have yet to receive a response (it's been 3 months).
I then contacted the firm who signed the property off, they said it aligned with the structural engineer's design and complied and that any issues rests with the developers.
I also contacted the council (as it was built on land bought off them but had imposed covenants by then) but they weren't interested.

I now wanted to ask here if there's any grounds I can take the developers to the small claims court to seek £10k in damages due to poor design and inadequate warranty.
I was planning to send a court notice letter (by using the template on this site) to see if it will prompt them to open communication with me, as I've been ignored twice already.

Please let me know if it's worth the effort or if it looks like a lost cause 

Many thanks everyone.

propertyrental

What does your solicitor say?

eddddy

• You didn't buy from the developer, so it's difficult to see how you have any basis for a claim against them.

• A warranty was transferred to you, but you seem to accept that the warranty doesn't cover the flat roof, so you don't have any basis for a claim against the warranty provider.

• You had no contract with the firm who signed off the property, so you don't have any basis for a claim against them.

• You had a contract with the person you bought the house from, but it's extremely unlikely that they included any additional warranty on the flat roof.

So it's really difficult to see who you might win a claim against. It sounds like you'll just have to live with the cost.


(I guess there's a vague possibility of a claim against your solicitor for negligence - he/she failed to spot that the main warranty required an a separate insurance backed warranty on the flat roof. But that feels like a very long-shot.)

user1977

eddddy said:

(I guess there's a vague possibility of a claim against your solicitor for negligence - he/she failed to spot that the main warranty required an a separate insurance backed warranty on the flat roof. But that feels like a very long-shot.)

Maybe the OP can clarify whether their solicitor gave them any advice about the warranty.

I agree I can't see any other avenues for a claim.

sourfn2

eddddy said:

So it's really difficult to see who you might win a claim against. It sounds like you'll just have to live with the cost.

(I guess there's a vague possibility of a claim against your solicitor for negligence - he/she failed to spot that the main warranty required an a separate insurance backed warranty on the flat roof. But that feels like a very long-shot.)

Thank you for your reply. I understand I'm probably at a loss due to all the handovers, I'm just a little bitter people can build shoddy houses, getting them signed off and dust their hands with it 😮‍💨 

propertyrental said:

What does your solicitor say?

I did speak to them, but they only referred me to their housing disputes team who wanted to blame the developers but wouldn't open a case unless I paid for their time on it.

user1977 said:
Maybe the OP can clarify whether their solicitor gave them any advice about the warranty.

I agree I can't see any other avenues for a claim.

My solicitors didn't highlight this caveat to me, so I guessed they missed it. Had I been notified of it, I would've inquired about the previous owner obtaining this or ensuring the IBG was in place before purchasing (as I was thinking the warranty covered it).

I know it's a long shot, but I just wanted to be certain before I try make peace with it. On the plus side, the new flat roof is a much nicer design than the previous (and 10 year guarantee), so worst case I can look at it as a self-funded upgrade.

I appreciate the responses!

sourfn2

To confirm, I haven't yet directly challenged the solicitors about their negligence in reading through the warranty documents.

Alter_ego

sourfn2 said:

To confirm, I haven't yet directly challenged the solicitors about their negligence in reading through the warranty documents.

Did you tell the solicitor there was a flat roof? If not how could they know?

user1977

sourfn2 said:

eddddy said:

So it's really difficult to see who you might win a claim against. It sounds like you'll just have to live with the cost.

(I guess there's a vague possibility of a claim against your solicitor for negligence - he/she failed to spot that the main warranty required an a separate insurance backed warranty on the flat roof. But that feels like a very long-shot.)

Thank you for your reply. I understand I'm probably at a loss due to all the handovers, I'm just a little bitter people can build shoddy houses, getting them signed off and dust their hands with it 😮‍💨 

propertyrental said:

What does your solicitor say?

I did speak to them, but they only referred me to their housing disputes team who wanted to blame the developers but wouldn't open a case unless I paid for their time on it.

user1977 said:
Maybe the OP can clarify whether their solicitor gave them any advice about the warranty.

I agree I can't see any other avenues for a claim.

My solicitors didn't highlight this caveat to me, so I guessed they missed it.

You still haven't clarified what (if anything) they did say to you about the warranty...

silvercar

sourfn2 said:

To confirm, I haven't yet directly challenged the solicitors about their negligence in reading through the warranty documents.

You could put in a complaint to them. All solicitors have a complaints procedure.

Alter_ego said:

sourfn2 said:

To confirm, I haven't yet directly challenged the solicitors about their negligence in reading through the warranty documents.

Did you tell the solicitor there was a flat roof? If not how could they know?

If there is specific mention that the flat roof doesn’t fall under the warranty, then that’s the clue that it exists. If it just fails to mention th e flat roof then they wouldn’t know.

ThisIsWeird

I have no idea how scenarios like this, involving buildings and constructions, differ in consumer rights with other purchased 'goods' purchased products such as home appliances, cars, etc. - but with the latter, there will almost certainly be a valid claim outwith any warranties if it can be demonstrated that the 'fault' was present from manufacture.

Sourfn would appear to have a good case if that applies; he seems to have pretty good evidence of incorrect construction.

eddddy

ThisIsWeird said:

I have no idea how scenarios like this, involving buildings and constructions, differ in consumer rights with other purchased 'goods' purchased products such as home appliances, cars, etc. - but with the latter, there will almost certainly be a valid claim outwith any warranties if it can be demonstrated that the 'fault' was present from manufacture.

Sourfn would appear to have a good case if that applies; he seems to have pretty good evidence of incorrect construction.

It sounds like you're referring to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

That doesn't apply in this case for multiple reasons.

1. The OP bought their house from a private individual, not from a trader.

2. The Act doesn't apply to land and houses anyway (even if you buy them from a trader - e.g. a developer)...

38. ... Essentially “goods” means anything physical which you can move (“any tangible moveable item”). Therefore, Chapter 2 of Part 1 of the Act (the goods Chapter) does not apply to purchases of immovable property such as land or a house.

Link: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/notes/division/3

However, other consumer protection legislation applies to traders such as Estate Agents and Developers

For example, The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 would apply to the Estate Agent who sold the house to the OP. But there's nothing in that legislation that would help the OP in this case.