Pre Exchange and Completion Visits. Plus Freezing Pipes.

squidley

Good afternoon,

Going through the process now of moving house. Last time I moved house was getting on for 40 years ago. However, so far so good.

Do buyers tend to visit the property just before exchange and then again just before completion?
I just wondered what the norm is.

Also, the house we are hopefully moving into is vacant. So it will be empty over the cold winter period. I'm assuming the house will be either drained down or the heating kept on. It is something I will try to ascertain, but again, wondered what the norm was (if there is one). However, out of interest, what would be the legal situation if we moved in on completion day and there was flooding due to a burst pipe.  Either on completion day or a day or two after. 

propertyrental

Viewing just before Exchange is wise, though to be honest few people seem to do it. Legally the seller has to hand over the property at Completion in the same condition as it was at Exchange, so you can't rely on a viewing done weeks or months earlier.

If the seller/agent is unhelpful or refuses, you simply say you'll not Exchange without a viewing (and make sure your solicitor knows!).

Before Completion is different. You have no right to insist and if you ask and the seller refuses you are still committed to Complete. Wait till Completion then deal with issues (if any) after that.

eddddy

squidley said:

I'm assuming the house will be either drained down or the heating kept on. It is something I will try to ascertain, but again, wondered what the norm was (if there is one). 

Probably the best approach is to agree with the seller what should done - before contracts are exchanged, and maybe make it a term in the contract.

For example, tell the seller you want the mains turned off and heating system drained before contracts are exchanged and left that way until completion. Assuming the seller agrees, the solicitor can add that as a term in the contract.

propertyrental

eddddy said:

squidley said:

I'm assuming the house will be either drained down or the heating kept on. It is something I will try to ascertain, but again, wondered what the norm was (if there is one). 

Probably the best approach is to agree with the seller what should done - before contracts are exchanged, and maybe make it a term in the contract.

For example, tell the seller you want the mains turned off and heating system drained before contracts are exchanged and left that way until completion. Assuming the seller agrees, the solicitor can add that as a term in the contract.

Bear in mind also the risk passes to you at Exchange which is why you are advised (or forced if using a mortgage lender) to insure from that date.

And most insurance policies will require the system to be drained down if the property is 'unoccupied' (definition varies by between insurers).

Bigphil1474

The owner of the empty property should have buildings insurance - I sold my dads earlier this year and we had buildings insurance from a couple of weeks after he died until the house was sold. We also had to at least a weekly check on the empty house to make sure it was okay, so your sellers would probably need the same - until it's yours.

As far as I know, they may visit just before exchange and expect it to be pretty much the same on completion.

Slinky

If you're moving in in the winter, the last thing you want is to be having to muck about having your heating system refilled when you're moving in. I'd try and get them to agree to keep the heating on low overnight, which is what we did with ours when it was empty waiting for a tenant to move in. We set the boiler to come on for an hour a couple of times overnight which was enough.

And yes, we visited just before exchange, even though it was a 220 miles round trip to do so.

Mutton_Geoff

Slinky said:

If you're moving in in the winter, the last thing you want is to be having to muck about having your heating system refilled when you're moving in. I'd try and get them to agree to keep the heating on low overnight, which is what we did with ours when it was empty waiting for a tenant to move in. We set the boiler to come on for an hour a couple of times overnight which was enough.

And yes, we visited just before exchange, even though it was a 220 miles round trip to do so.

There are plenty of times in the winter when the lowest temperature can be in the day. Leave it set to 15C for 24 hours a day despite the cost. The OP will be liable from exchange of contracts, the heating costs will be trivial compared to the cost of a flood due to damaged/frozen pipes.

squidley

Thank you all for your comments. 

I will arrange for a visit just prior to exchange. And, hopefully, another one prior to completion. I will also ensure I have it insured from exchange as well.

I will also speak to the EA about the sellers plans on draining down, or heating the house to prevent frozen pipes. If I have any issues with that I will speak to my solicitor. My preference would be for the house to be drained down. It shouldn't be too much hassle for me as I have a plumber in the family who will be on hand to help refill the system on moving in day.

Mutton_Geoff. Thank you. When you say I would be liable from exchange of contracts presumably you mean for the building and not the heating costs. 

Thanks. 

eddddy

squidley said:

Mutton_Geoff. Thank you. When you say I would be liable from exchange of contracts presumably you mean for the building and not the heating costs. 

It depends on what you agree about heating costs - before exchange of contracts.

It's much better to get stuff done in advance to prevent problems arising (e.g. draining the system) - rather than having arguments and litigation after a problem has occurred.



FWIW, an empty house I was helping to sell was (slightly) vandalised between exchange and completion - a window was smashed, somebody climbed in and did a bit of damage.

I asked my solicitor who was responsible for putting right the damage - he described it as a 'grey area', but said he would inform the buyer's solicitor. And he said that it's unlikely that the buyer would attempt litigation because of the costs involved.

(The damage wasn't fixed before completion, and we didn't hear anything from the buyer.)

Gavin83

eddddy said:

squidley said:

Mutton_Geoff. Thank you. When you say I would be liable from exchange of contracts presumably you mean for the building and not the heating costs. 

FWIW, an empty house I was helping to sell was (slightly) vandalised between exchange and completion - a window was smashed, somebody climbed in and did a bit of damage.

I asked my solicitor who was responsible for putting right the damage - he described it as a 'grey area', but said he would inform the buyer's solicitor. And he said that it's unlikely that the buyer would attempt litigation because of the costs involved.

(The damage wasn't fixed before completion, and we didn't hear anything from the buyer.)

My understanding is the vendor has a duty to keep the property in the same condition it was at exchange but this doesn't extend beyond negligence. So if for example they put a hole in the wall moving furniture they'd be liable to fix it. However if an 'accident' occurs, such as someone breaking in or a pipe bursting then they're not considered responsible and it's the buyers problem. It's why insurance from exchange is important because if that house was to burn down through no fault of the vendor then you'd be on the hook for buying a pile of soot and the costs of rebuilding it yourself.

I expect the grey area and the real debate were it to go to court would be whether the vendor was negligent or not. That's not an argument you want to be getting into as it's expensive and potentially hard to prove so just make sure you're always covered.

squidley

Thank you. That's very interesting. 

In my naivety I never realised such a grey area could exist. I naturally assumed that the house on completion would be exactly the same as the house on exchange. And if any damage was done during the "inbetween" period it would naturally be up to the seller to put things right. 

Am I right in thinking there is a standard contract of sale when you buy/sell a house? And if so does that not address the issue of what happens if things go wrong during this period?

It has certainly given me something to think about.