Breach of missives (Scotland)

AnotnaC7

Just purchased a property in Scotland the property was supposed to include all furniture as detailed in missives. The day I got the keys I discovered that all the furniture had been removed. The seller and agent acknowledged that there had been a mix up and all the furniture went to charity. They have offered £200 compensation then raised it to £750, my request was £1500 based on buying second hand furniture (within reason). It is now my intention to go to small claims for breach of missives and misdescriptions act. I believe they don’t have a leg to stand on, anyone know where I actually stand and who am I taking to court seller or agent??

user1977

Your contract is with the seller, the agent doesn't come into it. It isn't "misdescriptions" if it's a mix-up and they removed the furniture in error.

Haven't you sought any advice from your solicitor?

AnotnaC7

I discussed it with him but he does not have litigation department. If it is advertised and sold as all furniture included as detailed in missives surely a misunderstanding is not an acceptable excuse. I bought it as I had the potential to rent it out from day one, it was one of the main factors in my decision to buy that property.

Largs

This is not a "misunderstanding" I would go to Citizens' Advice because its free. You are in the right here and the fact they are negotiating leaves them wide open.

user1977

AnotnaC7 said:

If it is advertised and sold as all furniture included as detailed in missives surely a misunderstanding is not an acceptable excuse.

But nobody is claiming that it's an excuse? The only debate appears to be about what the value of the furniture is. And second-hand furniture is typically worth very little, which is why it ends up donated to charities.

AnotnaC7

user1977 said:

AnotnaC7 said:

If it is advertised and sold as all furniture included as detailed in missives surely a misunderstanding is not an acceptable excuse.

But nobody is claiming that it's an excuse? The only debate appears to be about what the value of the furniture is. And second-hand furniture is typically worth very little, which is why it ends up donated to charities.

But it is a Breach of missives? They have admitted their guilt with their initial offers. I am trying to gauge my chances in small claims court.

user1977

AnotnaC7 said:

user1977 said:

AnotnaC7 said:

If it is advertised and sold as all furniture included as detailed in missives surely a misunderstanding is not an acceptable excuse.

But nobody is claiming that it's an excuse? The only debate appears to be about what the value of the furniture is. And second-hand furniture is typically worth very little, which is why it ends up donated to charities.

But it is a Breach of missives? They have admitted their guilt with their initial offers.

I'm not sure if you think that means something different from what I've told you. Your remedy is to get the value of the stuff which wasn't left for you. Or to get the furniture itself.

Are you thinking that you get something on top of that because they're "guilty"?

AnotnaC7

user1977 said:

AnotnaC7 said:

user1977 said:

AnotnaC7 said:

If it is advertised and sold as all furniture included as detailed in missives surely a misunderstanding is not an acceptable excuse.

But nobody is claiming that it's an excuse? The only debate appears to be about what the value of the furniture is. And second-hand furniture is typically worth very little, which is why it ends up donated to charities.

But it is a Breach of missives? They have admitted their guilt with their initial offers.

I'm not sure if you think that means something different from what I've told you. Your remedy is to get the value of the stuff which wasn't left for you. Or to get the furniture itself.

Are you thinking that you get something on top of that because they're "guilty"?

I think that £1500 is a fair reflection on what would required to replace the furniture that was removed, I believe their offer is too low. As i said it removed the potential to rent out from day 1. I will claim price of new furniture and compensation. The furniture belonged to me legally.

user1977

AnotnaC7 said:

user1977 said:

AnotnaC7 said:

user1977 said:

AnotnaC7 said:

If it is advertised and sold as all furniture included as detailed in missives surely a misunderstanding is not an acceptable excuse.

But nobody is claiming that it's an excuse? The only debate appears to be about what the value of the furniture is. And second-hand furniture is typically worth very little, which is why it ends up donated to charities.

But it is a Breach of missives? They have admitted their guilt with their initial offers.

I'm not sure if you think that means something different from what I've told you. Your remedy is to get the value of the stuff which wasn't left for you. Or to get the furniture itself.

Are you thinking that you get something on top of that because they're "guilty"?

I think that £1500 is a fair reflection on what would required to replace the furniture that was removed, I believe their offer is too low. As i said it removed the potential to rent out from day 1. I will claim price of new furniture and compensation..

New furniture? But it wasn't new furniture. And you're not entitled to "compensation" on top of the value of the furniture (unless your missives included some unusual provision for consequential loss).

comeandgo

I suggest you go to the charity shop and buy back the furniture and then get the money from your seller.  Second hand furniture has little value.

Mstty

Exactly what furniture were you expecting to be left?