ESTATE AGENTS MISREPRESENTATION

ExEstateAgent

GDB2222 said:

The law is extremely clear.

You are saying that you don't have enough facts, so you don't know whether the law applies. But, the OP has no duty to satisfy your curiosity. In the end, they just need to satisfy a judge or the ombudsman.

Still clear is it? Given what the OP has said it still sounds like it was their assumption of the situation rather than any misrepresentation (although they still haven't clarified that point but as you say, there's no need for them to do so, but it makes answering their query rather difficult). 

GDB2222

lincroft1710 said:

Suebedoo2 said:

I am going to put in a complaint as I have nothing to lose apart from time but will wait until completion (whenever that may be).  I won't take it to court unless I really think that I will win as I don't want to be out of pocket any further.   

If you suffer from anxiety, the last thing you want to do is take an EA to court. As well as the months' waiting for a hearing date, the EA may well have a friendly solicitor who would represent them and take great delight in tearing your not very strong case to shreds

Will the agent still be friends with the solicitor when they get the bill, though? Assuming this is in the small claims track, it would be very unlikely that the op would have to pay any of the estate agent’s legal fees. 

In practice, it’s a lot easier to use the ombudsman, which is zero risk for the consumer. 

GDB2222

ExEstateAgent said:

GDB2222 said:

The law is extremely clear.

You are saying that you don't have enough facts, so you don't know whether the law applies. But, the OP has no duty to satisfy your curiosity. In the end, they just need to satisfy a judge or the ombudsman.

Still clear is it? Given what the OP has said it still sounds like it was their assumption of the situation rather than any misrepresentation (although they still haven't clarified that point but as you say, there's no need for them to do so, but it makes answering their query rather difficult). 

Yes, the law is perfectly clear. I don’t understand why you keep asking. The question is whether the estate agent did mislead the op, which does not appear any longer to be the case.  

ExEstateAgent

GDB2222 said:

ExEstateAgent said:

GDB2222 said:

The law is extremely clear.

You are saying that you don't have enough facts, so you don't know whether the law applies. But, the OP has no duty to satisfy your curiosity. In the end, they just need to satisfy a judge or the ombudsman.

Still clear is it? Given what the OP has said it still sounds like it was their assumption of the situation rather than any misrepresentation (although they still haven't clarified that point but as you say, there's no need for them to do so, but it makes answering their query rather difficult). 

Yes, the law is perfectly clear. I don’t understand why you keep asking. The question is whether the estate agent did mislead the op, which does not appear any longer to be the case.  

I wasn't questioning whether the law was right or wrong here, I was pointing out that your assertion was wrong because the OP hadn't clarified if the EA had in fact mislead them, which as you now agree, doesn't appear to be the case! 

eddddy

I don't think the OP has any recourse. Even if they were told that there was no chain things can change. The vendor may have changed their mind about what they were doing next. They could even decide not to move at all. Until exchange there's no liability on either party (unless a specific legally enforceable agreement was drawn up and penalties agreed in advance). 

So just to recap - the post quoted above and other similar ones are misleading/incorrect.

If the estate agent had said there was no chain when the estate agent knew there was a chain, the estate agent would have:

• Broken consumer Consumer Protection Laws
• Breached the Property Ombudsman code of practice

And the estate agent could be liable for damages.

If the buyer suffered a financial loss as a result of the estate agent giving incorrect information, the Property Ombudsman can order the estate agent to pay compensation. (This wouldn't require a court claim, or anything like that. Just a complaint to the Ombudsman, who would then investigate.)


But in the OP's case, it doesn't really sound like the estate agent said there was no chain. It sounds like it might have been a misunderstanding or assumption by the buyer.

lincroft1710

GDB2222 said:

lincroft1710 said:

Suebedoo2 said:

I am going to put in a complaint as I have nothing to lose apart from time but will wait until completion (whenever that may be).  I won't take it to court unless I really think that I will win as I don't want to be out of pocket any further.   

If you suffer from anxiety, the last thing you want to do is take an EA to court. As well as the months' waiting for a hearing date, the EA may well have a friendly solicitor who would represent them and take great delight in tearing your not very strong case to shreds

Will the agent still be friends with the solicitor when they get the bill, though? Assuming this is in the small claims track, it would be very unlikely that the op would have to pay any of the estate agent’s legal fees. 

In practice, it’s a lot easier to use the ombudsman, which is zero risk for the consumer. 

If the solicitor gets frequent client referral from the EA, they may well do it "pro bono" or certainly at reduced rates.