Small Claims Case (Scotland) - House sellers removed EV charger from property

mexican_dave

Did you say the seller said EV charger did not belong to the sellers, so it must belong to someone - to you or an electric company etc. Suggest you get a message to the sellers that you will report theft to police and the electric company - see if that has any effect. Would help if you contact your electric supplier and REC (Regional Electricity Company) the latter is responsible for the cables and equipment coming into your house - they might know something too. There may be an installation certificate for this work, which will tell you who the electrician was and who "client" was - could be the "owner" of the EV. Getting that "owners" name might help.

FreeBear

mexican_dave said:  Suggest you get a message to the sellers that you will report theft to police and the electric company - see if that has any effect.

Go down that route, and you will get branded a nut job and earn the contempt & derision of everyone involved. The police will certainly not be interested and will tell you to stop wasting their time.

martindow

Going back to an earlier point regarding making a claim, it was mentioned that serving it on the estate agents to forward to the seller would suffice.  Some doubt was raised as to whether you actually need to send it to their new address.

OP, do you now have the address or checked whether service to the agent would be considered valid by the court?

Ditzy_Mitzy

user1977 said:

penners324 said:

The charger didn't belong to the home owner, so no way is it getting refitted to the house.

That's the seller's problem though. It's still a breach of contract by them.

It probably is, however a counter-argument might be made that the contract - or at least the part pertaining to the electric car charger - would be frustrated under the principle of nemo dat quod non habet.  It's possible that the seller, or the seller's representative(s), have just made a mistake.  

If the charger is leased, rather than owned, I'm not sure that the buyer would gain title in any case.  

Herzlos

Assuming you just want "a" charger and not "that" charger, you can always send them a Letter Before Action asking for <figure> to reinstall a charger, based on a quote that you get. That may get them to either offer to reinstate the old one, or provide some indication of what it's actually worth.

Given you don't have any details of the actual model since it's not disclosed anywhere and isn't clear from any photos, that's probably the best you can do.

Whether you then pursue it or not is up to you.

CakeOrDeath

I forgot to mention that all wiring has been removed. There are just the mounting holes in the wall where it was and big hole through the wall for the power cable.

I haven't double checked the suitability of having the estate agent address yet. However, as mentioned, it was a solicitor that advised this initially and was confirmed when a friend who was successful in their small claims case against the seller of the property they bought. So for me this seems fine, but I understand some people are still sceptical.

I had a bit of luck and I actually got information on the exact charger that was there (through energy supplier). This will help as now I just need three quotes for that charger.

I agree that if the charger was purchased through some scheme where they are not the legal owners that they will not reinstate that charger. But I still think compensation is fair for breach of contract.

doodling

Hi,

Ditzy_Mitzy said:

user1977 said:

penners324 said:

The charger didn't belong to the home owner, so no way is it getting refitted to the house.

That's the seller's problem though. It's still a breach of contract by them.

It probably is, however a counter-argument might be made that the contract - or at least the part pertaining to the electric car charger - would be frustrated under the principle of nemo dat quod non habet.  It's possible that the seller, or the seller's representative(s), have just made a mistake.  

If the charger is leased, rather than owned, I'm not sure that the buyer would gain title in any case.  

How can the contract between the buyer and seller of the property be frustrated?

The contract will have clearly stated that the property being sold was as it was at a particular point in the sale process and the seller will have had the opportunity to exclude items as required.  The house had a charger and it wasn't excluded.

The seller has clearly contacted to sell a house with an EV charger and has failed to fulfill their side of the bargain.  The seller gets to pay to put it right.

Saying "Ooops I made a mistake" will get the seller nowhere.  Similarly, the seller not having the right to sell the charger will get the seller nowhere - they agreed to sell a house with a charger, they may not be able to sell that particular charger but they can certainly compensate the buyer for their failure to do so.

CakeOrDeath

UPDATE

I submitted my claim and won! Just wanted to thank everyone for their input on this matter and clarify a few points for anyone that might find themselves in a similar situation.

Scottish Standard Clause 1.1.4 states that electric vehicle chargers are deemed a fixture/fitting of the property, and therefore part of the property, if present when the property is viewed and Scottish Standard Clause 1.3 states that at the date of settlement, all the items included in the price are owned by the seller. Therefore, the seller cannot say they forgot to mention they don't actually own an item that is deemed part of the property after the closing date. This is a breach of the missives. If the seller of a property wants to take an item that is fixture or fitting they must do so by clearly excluding it from the missives during the negotiation process and before the closing date.

Even though I was advised to put the estate agent address in the claim form, this turned out to be incorrect. There is an additional form to fill in if you do not know the new address of the seller. 

Thanks again everyone!

ThisIsWeird

Nice!
So you won against the seller, and not the EA?

user1977

ThisIsWeird said:

Nice!
So you won against the seller, and not the EA?

Their claim was never against the EA, the question was just what address you use for the seller.