House damage occurring between exchange and completion

d2blocker

Dear all,

I would be grateful on your opinions on the following query:

Buyer and Seller completed exchange with completion date set 3 days later (on a Friday.) Buyer has now taken out building insurance at point of exchange. Seller decided to keep hold of their insurance till midnight of completion date.

In between exchange and completion the buyer is notified that damage has occurred to some tiles/fascia board on garage property due to high winds. No evidence to suggest damage caused directly by sellers. No evidence to suggest such damage occurred prior to exchange.

Buyer now requests assurance that damage will be rectified by the seller.

Question:

Who is now legally responsible in repairs? - both parties hold insurance, however, likelihood is that sellers insurance will refuse the claim as exchange has gone through and damage occurred between exchange and completion. However, buyer also would wish to have property in the state it was at point of exchange.

Thank you for your time in reading

MattMattMattUK

d2blocker said:

Dear all,

I would be grateful on your opinions on the following query:

Buyer and Seller completed exchange with completion date set 3 days later (on a Friday.) Buyer has now taken out building insurance at point of exchange. Seller decided to keep hold of their insurance till midnight of completion date.

In between exchange and completion the buyer is notified that damage has occurred to some tiles/fascia board on garage property due to high winds. No evidence to suggest damage caused directly by sellers. No evidence to suggest such damage occurred prior to exchange.

Buyer now requests assurance that damage will be rectified by the seller.

Question:

Who is now legally responsible in repairs? - both parties hold insurance, however, likelihood is that sellers insurance will refuse the claim as exchange has gone through and damage occurred between exchange and completion. However, buyer also would wish to have property in the state it was at point of exchange.

Thank you for your time in reading

The person who will own it once completion has taken place. It becomes the buyer's legal responsibility once they exchange contracts. 

GDB2222

Your contract includes the standard conditions, which are available here. 

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/property/standard-conditions-of-sale

Section 5 answers your questions. 

If there is extensive damage, you should inform your lender, who may refuse to lend! However, this all sounds pretty minor stuff, fortunately. 

ThisIsWeird

Forget insurance for the moment. My understanding is that the buyer should expect the house to be - at completion - largely in the condition it was when viewed/offered on/offer accepted/contracts exchanged. That's why it's recommend to view again immediately prior to completion - has the kitchen been trashed? The boiler removed? The flooring lifted? Someone kicked in a door? If so, the seller is surely liable for all these?

This house, due to external circumstances, is still not as viewed/offered/exchanged on. The seller should therefore put this right, or compensate.

The buyer might even have a valid reason for not completing until this has been done, or until an acceptable arrangement has been agreed on, and I doubt the seller could argue.

It does sound like a non-insurance job, tho' - surely a few £undred would cover it? I'd like to think the seller would offer this option, or even arrange for a repair and pay up-front.

Caveat - but I don't know...

GDB2222

ThisIsWeird said:

Forget insurance for the moment. My understanding is that the buyer should expect the house to be - at completion - largely in the condition it was when viewed/offered on/offer accepted/contracts exchanged. That's why it's recommend to view again immediately prior to completion - has the kitchen been trashed? The boiler removed? The flooring lifted? Someone kicked in a door? If so, the seller is surely liable for all these?

This house, due to external circumstances, is still not as viewed/offered/exchanged on. The seller should therefore put this right, or compensate.

The buyer might even have a valid reason for not completing until this has been done, or until an acceptable arrangement has been agreed on, and I doubt the seller could argue.

It does sound like a non-insurance job, tho' - surely a few £undred would cover it? I'd like to think the seller would offer this option, or even arrange for a repair and pay up-front.

Caveat - but I don't know...

You are arguing from the point of view of what you think is 'fair', and I totally agree from a moral point of view. However, the contract to buy the house deals with this issue at some length, and it is the buyer's responsibility unfortunately.

We are currently using the 5th edition of the standard conditions. The 4th edition had the responsibility the other way round, which is more sensible in my view. I don’t know why it was changed. 

eddddy

ThisIsWeird said:

Forget insurance for the moment. My understanding is that the buyer should expect the house to be - at completion - largely in the condition it was when viewed/offered on/offer accepted/contracts exchanged. That's why it's recommend to view again immediately prior to completion - has the kitchen been trashed? The boiler removed? The flooring lifted? Someone kicked in a door? If so, the seller is surely liable for all these?

This house, due to external circumstances, is still not as viewed/offered/exchanged on. The seller should therefore put this right, or compensate.

The buyer might even have a valid reason for not completing until this has been done, or until an acceptable arrangement has been agreed on, and I doubt the seller could argue.

It does sound like a non-insurance job, tho' - surely a few £undred would cover it? I'd like to think the seller would offer this option, or even arrange for a repair and pay up-front.

Caveat - but I don't know...

If the damage to the tiles/facia was the seller's 'fault' - your assessment would be correct.

For example, if the seller had removed the tiles, or negligently kicked a football at the tiles, then the seller would be responsible for the damage/repairs.

But otherwise, the buyer takes on all the risk at exchange of contracts. That's why solicitors will always advise buyers to take out buildings insurance from exchange of contracts.

Marvel1

ThisIsWeird said:

Forget insurance for the moment. My understanding is that the buyer should expect the house to be - at completion - largely in the condition it was when viewed/offered on/offer accepted/contracts exchanged. That's why it's recommend to view again immediately prior to completion - has the kitchen been trashed? The boiler removed? The flooring lifted? Someone kicked in a door? If so, the seller is surely liable for all these?

This house, due to external circumstances, is still not as viewed/offered/exchanged on. The seller should therefore put this right, or compensate.

The buyer might even have a valid reason for not completing until this has been done, or until an acceptable arrangement has been agreed on, and I doubt the seller could argue.

It does sound like a non-insurance job, tho' - surely a few £undred would cover it? I'd like to think the seller would offer this option, or even arrange for a repair and pay up-front.

Caveat - but I don't know...

Whatv is the purpose of having insurance at exchange and not completion?

ThisIsWeird

Marvel1 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Forget insurance for the moment. My understanding is that the buyer should expect the house to be - at completion - largely in the condition it was when viewed/offered on/offer accepted/contracts exchanged. That's why it's recommend to view again immediately prior to completion - has the kitchen been trashed? The boiler removed? The flooring lifted? Someone kicked in a door? If so, the seller is surely liable for all these?

This house, due to external circumstances, is still not as viewed/offered/exchanged on. The seller should therefore put this right, or compensate.

The buyer might even have a valid reason for not completing until this has been done, or until an acceptable arrangement has been agreed on, and I doubt the seller could argue.

It does sound like a non-insurance job, tho' - surely a few £undred would cover it? I'd like to think the seller would offer this option, or even arrange for a repair and pay up-front.

Caveat - but I don't know...

Whatv is the purpose of having insurance at exchange and not completion?

In case the seller doesn't. Tobesuretobesure.

I am not at all clear about who has the 'responsibility' here, the buyer or seller, but 'morally' I feel it's the seller's responsibility to pass on the house on completion largely as it was 'sold'.

But, if the boiler broke down, or a pipe burst, or a wall collapsed, who would be responsible for putting it right? It is not yet the buyer's house.

I wonder if the buyer's insurance would even set about to claim it from the seller's insurance, should the buyer make a claim?

user1977

ThisIsWeird said:

Marvel1 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Forget insurance for the moment. My understanding is that the buyer should expect the house to be - at completion - largely in the condition it was when viewed/offered on/offer accepted/contracts exchanged. That's why it's recommend to view again immediately prior to completion - has the kitchen been trashed? The boiler removed? The flooring lifted? Someone kicked in a door? If so, the seller is surely liable for all these?

This house, due to external circumstances, is still not as viewed/offered/exchanged on. The seller should therefore put this right, or compensate.

The buyer might even have a valid reason for not completing until this has been done, or until an acceptable arrangement has been agreed on, and I doubt the seller could argue.

It does sound like a non-insurance job, tho' - surely a few £undred would cover it? I'd like to think the seller would offer this option, or even arrange for a repair and pay up-front.

Caveat - but I don't know...

Whatv is the purpose of having insurance at exchange and not completion?

I am not at all clear about who has the 'responsibility' here, the buyer or seller

Luckily some people here do know, and have already given the correct answer.

I wonder if the buyer's insurance would even set about to claim it from the seller's insurance, should the buyer make a claim?

That's not how insurance works. The seller's insurers are only liable for things which the seller is liable for, there aren't different legal rules which apply just because one or both parties happen to have insurance.