Property Sold stating driveway but legally I cannot use it as there is no dropped kerb

GDB2222

I’ve only had to deal with TPOS once, and on that occasion they were very much looking for a compromise solution that didn’t affect the estate agent too badly, even though they had broken the code of conduct. 

Anaida9999

eddddy said:

This thread seems to have wandered in many different directions.

In simple terms, the core issue seems to be that Trading Standards and The Property Ombudsman say that when there is no dropped kerb, an estate agent should say words to the effect of...

• "There is space for parking, but there is no dropped kerb, so you should ask your solicitor about this"

(Estate agents are not legally trained - so the estate agent is not expected to know whether anything to do with this is legal or illegal.

And bear in mind that a conveyancing solicitor doesn't visit the property, so they will not know about this unless their client tells them.)

So it seems that the key questions are...

• Did the estate agent say words like those mentioned above - in the property listing/advertising, or when the OP phoned to arrange a viewing, or at the viewing, or at any other time?

• Has the OP suffered a financial loss as a result of the estate agent not mentioning words like those?

(FWIW, Trading Standards and The Property Ombudsman would probably say that suitable wording [equivalent to the above] should be included in the property advertising - or at the very least, the buyer should be informed before they travel to a viewing.)

nothing like this was said, it just says 'DRIVEWAY' on the sales particulars

sheramber

You  bought the house 12 months ago  ( or more).

Why have you not raised this with the estate agent before now?

GDB2222

sheramber said:

You  bought the house 12 months ago  ( or more).

Why have you not raised this with the estate agent before now?

If you read the thread, you will find the answer to that question. 

sheramber

GDB2222 said:

sheramber said:

You  bought the house 12 months ago  ( or more).

Why have you not raised this with the estate agent before now?

If you read the thread, you will find the answer to that question. 

Ihave followed this thread from the beginning and the only reason Ihave seen for  nbringing it up now is because he wants a charging point.

so, it appears buying a house with no dropped kerb was not a problem a year ago.

Abiy late to makje a complaint about it after accepting it for over a year.

Smalltownhypocrite

Surely this is classic buyer beware.

1) you could actively SEE the issue, your ignorance is your own issue as the law on drop kerbs are common knowledge (and no I have NEVER owned a drive in my life but know that) and ignorance of law is not usable as defense.

2) any issue with lack of permissions or regulation not being met should have been found and raised during the conveyancing process.

I lost out on a house (and all money spend on surveys etc...) because the person who listed it for sale didn't actually own the property which is apparently perfectly legal in English house buying system (anyone can list anything unchecked its only when you get to the legal bit the fact that its unsellable comes up) by comparison this seems like a non issue really. You bought and got exactly what you saw, nothing has changed except you 'knowledge' of house buying which you should have looked into during the process not a year later after completing the contract.

user1977

We still have no explanation of why the installer won't proceed? The problem is the OP's one, not theirs.

Section62

Smalltownhypocrite said:

Surely this is classic buyer beware.

eddddy has already covered this - The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 effectively limits the scope of 'buyer beware' in that a prospective buyer of a property being marketed by an EA has to be given certain information, the onus isn't on them (and their solicitor) to find out everything themselves.

However, this does create a conundrum that an EA could be in breach of The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by "Giving false or misleading information to consumers" if they tell a prospective buyer it is illegal to park on a driveway with no dropped kerb.  In other words, Catch-22.

Smalltownhypocrite said:

1) you could actively SEE the issue, your ignorance is your own issue as the law on drop kerbs are common knowledge (and no I have NEVER owned a drive in my life but know that) and ignorance of law is not usable as defense.

The problem here - from my POV as a one-time highway engineer - is that the "common knowledge" of the law is incorrect.  This is not helped by a multitude of organisations who should really know better putting out information which goes along with the incorrect "common knowledge" - and there seems to be very little enthusiasm among them to check what the law actually says.

'Ignorance of the law...as a defence' isn't relevant here, because the EA has an obligation to [mis]inform buyers about the dropped kerb issue.

Emmia

Section62 said:

Smalltownhypocrite said:

Surely this is classic buyer beware.

eddddy has already covered this - The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 effectively limits the scope of 'buyer beware' in that a prospective buyer of a property being marketed by an EA has to be given certain information, the onus isn't on them (and their solicitor) to find out everything themselves.

However, this does create a conundrum that an EA could be in breach of The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by "Giving false or misleading information to consumers" if they tell a prospective buyer it is illegal to park on a driveway with no dropped kerb.  In other words, Catch-22.

Smalltownhypocrite said:

1) you could actively SEE the issue, your ignorance is your own issue as the law on drop kerbs are common knowledge (and no I have NEVER owned a drive in my life but know that) and ignorance of law is not usable as defense.

The problem here - from my POV as a one-time highway engineer - is that the "common knowledge" of the law is incorrect.  This is not helped by a multitude of organisations who should really know better putting out information which goes along with the incorrect "common knowledge" - and there seems to be very little enthusiasm among them to check what the law actually says.

'Ignorance of the law...as a defence' isn't relevant here, because the EA has an obligation to [mis]inform buyers about the dropped kerb issue.

But the OP bought 12 months ago, when the position of the lack of dropped kerb wasn't material to the purchase... Now it is because they want an EV and a charger installed. Estate Agents cannot be held liable for decisions made by purchasers well after the transaction has concluded - if they are what's the limit on liability? 1year, 5years, a decade... More?

Section62

Emmia said:

Section62 said:

Smalltownhypocrite said:

Surely this is classic buyer beware.

eddddy has already covered this - The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 effectively limits the scope of 'buyer beware' in that a prospective buyer of a property being marketed by an EA has to be given certain information, the onus isn't on them (and their solicitor) to find out everything themselves.

However, this does create a conundrum that an EA could be in breach of The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by "Giving false or misleading information to consumers" if they tell a prospective buyer it is illegal to park on a driveway with no dropped kerb.  In other words, Catch-22.

Smalltownhypocrite said:

1) you could actively SEE the issue, your ignorance is your own issue as the law on drop kerbs are common knowledge (and no I have NEVER owned a drive in my life but know that) and ignorance of law is not usable as defense.

The problem here - from my POV as a one-time highway engineer - is that the "common knowledge" of the law is incorrect.  This is not helped by a multitude of organisations who should really know better putting out information which goes along with the incorrect "common knowledge" - and there seems to be very little enthusiasm among them to check what the law actually says.

'Ignorance of the law...as a defence' isn't relevant here, because the EA has an obligation to [mis]inform buyers about the dropped kerb issue.

But the OP bought 12 months ago, when the position of the lack of dropped kerb wasn't material to the purchase... Now it is because they want an EV and a charger installed. Estate Agents cannot be held liable for decisions made by purchasers well after the transaction has concluded - if they are what's the limit on liability? 1year, 5years, a decade... More?

I hope I'm accurately representing eddddy's point, but it appears if the EA hasn't said the magic words then they are probably on the hook for compensation regardless of whether the issue was material to the purchase.  Not unlike the PPI/diesel emissions/car finance/Mastercard cases where being able to tick some boxes matters more than the facts of the case.

That said, in the case eddddy cited the complainant only got 25% of the cost of installing the dropped kerb.  And presumably the OP would need to get a quote from the council so the ombudsman has a figure to work with, which would mean contacting the council and therefore ruling out the possibility of indemnity insurance when the OP comes to sell, in the situation where they haven't been able to get a dropped kerb installed.

I know what I'd do.  And the point raised by user1977 is a key one which isn't getting the attention it deserves.