26 thoughts on “Property Information Form: 7 Key Issues You Should Watch Out For”
Hi, I have an escalating neighbour dispute over a fence that was replaced with a brand new one due to potentially erroneous boundary information on my property information form. Not only that, I strongly believe the previous owner’s were aware that this boundary wasn’t shared as noted on the PIF because they engaged in a similar dispute over the fence with the same neighbour, which must have been resolved one way or the other. This dispute was also not disclosed in the form but while trying to sort a compromise with the neighbour, was clearly tasty enough that they felt compelled to mention that they had to involve the solicitors and local council (a thinly veiled threat).
I did inform the neighbour of my intentions in advance. He told me it wasn’t a shared boundary, it is his but that he was fine with me replacing the fence as it is old. He asked whether I would paint his side and I said I would. I checked the PIF form which stated they are shared and assumed it was just him trying to assert authority (he’s a known problem neighbour). I then went on holiday and while away, the builder’s replaced the fence.
My neighbour is now looking to take me to the cleaner. His 25 year old rotten fence has been replaced with a brand new fence at my expense, however he is insistent that I flip the panels so he gets the ‘front’ side and also paint them brown, as agreed prior. I’ve said as a compromise that I would willingly paint the back. He has refused this offer and has threatened legal action. His only solution is that I flip the fence and paint it brown at my expense. I offered a further compromise of nailing ‘fronts to the back’ which is a technique to make a panel double sided, if he would be willing to contribute. He’s refused this compromise.
Obviously I’m £240+labour down over the fence which is now looking like a questionable investment but I’m also now locked in a really unpleasant dispute with a neighbour and it all originates from the fact I based my decision to proceed off the PIF.
We cannot provide specific advice on our website. What we can say is that it would always be more cost effective to try and reach a compromise with a difficult neighbour.
Boundary and neighbour disputes almost always quickly become out of hand and can have a long lasting impact on the ability to sell a property, which is probably why your seller was not overly keen to provide information about any historical issues.
The starting point would certainly be to ascertain where the boundary is and whose responsibility this is. Without wishing to sound disparaging, sometimes this comes down to educated guess work on the part of a surveyor if historical deeds are not available. We would also need to consider exactly what was agreed with your neighbour to decide whether the previous agreement reached about replacing the fence has compromised their ability to enforce any rights; it may be that they cannot now do so.
As for the seller, the ability to pursue a misrepresentation claim will depend on the terms of the contract agreed (which may exclude any right to pursue a claim for misrepresentation) and precisely what was said to you about the situation. It is vital to prove that the facts you were given were misleading. Silence about any fact does not ordinarily give rise to the ability to pursue a claim.
Hi there, in a bit of a pickle (very much on topic): I sold a leasehold rental property in 2021. Now years later later, the buyer has come back with a staggering bill for works that were supposedly notified to us via postal S20 notice back in 2020. Never received, possibly the tenants chucked the letters away along with all the spam, who knows. If i ever owed any money to freeholders, they simply chased via email. so I was never too concerned about missing post… until now that is.
During conveyancing in 2021, the freeholders (a major social housing landlord) were explicitly asked by my solicitor to issue all outstanding works notices. They failed to issue anything of the magnitude of the bills in question. There seems to be no other record of this notice from 2020 or since. I also don’t know whether the works were carried out during my ownership or after the sale.
So who’s liable now? The new owner’s solicitor is particularly accusatory and threatening to sue. In fact accusing me of intentionally covering up this S20 notice. I question their professionalism on that front to be honest. Not sure there’s a straight answer here.. but thank you anyway.
Sadly this is not an uncommon situation and local authorities in particular can be very slow to issue notices and invoices for major works, which can then come as a huge shock. It does cause all sorts of issues for poor leaseholders looking to buy or sell a property.
The basic position will more than likely than not be that the current owner is liable for the costs. This is why they are so upset. Payments falling due under a lease will generally be payable by the existing tenant.
Sometimes within the contract of sale, especially for leasehold properties, there are apportionment and retention clauses aimed at mitigating or preventing a buyer becoming liable for something the seller “should” be liable for (in the sense that the works are attributable to the seller’s period of ownership). For example, if service charge accounts have not been published at the point of sale and it is therefore unclear how much could owed by the seller and buyer for their period of ownership, the buyer might ask the seller’s solicitor to retain a certain sum from the proceeds of sale on account of this liability. By way of simple explanation, if a service charge is normally about £1,000 per year and the sale takes place halfway through the year, the buyer might ask the seller’s solicitor to hold on to £500, which would be a reasonable estimation of the cost, until the landlord or management company issue their demand for payment. That sum is then passed to the buyer to pay this. Sometimes there is a balancing payment to or from the seller required.
These sorts of clauses need to be considered in detail, so the contractual effect of them can be accounted for. You could be contractually liable for the sum now demanded from your buyer. However, if that were the case, they probably would have argued this already.
It sounds as though you have been accused of misrepresentation. A misrepresentation can be made innocently. For contrast, reckless or fraudulent misrepresentations can also be made. This is why someone does not care about the accuracy of what they say or knows what they are saying is untrue, respectively.
An innocent misrepresentation is still actionable. Whilst it is sometimes a defence to say what was said was substantially true (which might be relevant here), it is generally no defence to say that I represented something believing it to be true. If you are going to represent something, it should be done accurately.
The contract of sale may contain (and it usually does) a clause excluding liability for all but reckless or fraudulent misrepresentations, which may be why you are being accused of trying to conceal matters, to avoid this contractual agreement having any effect on your potential liability.
Where a defence (possibly a secondary defence after the point above regarding contractual liability for innocent misrepresentation) to this matter lies might also be in the question of reliance. See our article: https://cunningtons.co.uk/reliance-in-misrepresentation/
The buyer must have relied on what was said when deciding to proceed with the purchase. It is also generally not a defence to argue the buyer could have discovered the truth, but if it can be shown that on the information provided it could not possibly have been the case that the buyer relied on the implied suggestion that there would be no future liability to them in respect of what is now claimed, this would likely carry considerable weight in a Court.
We suggest you get in touch with us as soon as possible to discuss the matter further.
Hi The seller has admitted to repeatdly lieing in the Commercial Pre Contractural Enquiries Form, and other direct written communication with him.
We have bought the property £495,000 based on the information the seller gave, he lied about sole water connection and how many people connected to the sewage treatment plant. We do not have a sole water connection and we have discovered a Deed of Easement for another property to connect to our sewage treatment Plant, our Solicitor failed to report on.
Whether or not there is a misrepresentation claim against your seller will depend on the contractual terms agreed and what was specifically told to you by the seller. If it was factually inaccurate and you relied on this when entering into the agreement to purchase the property, there may be a misrepresentation claim.
Likewise, if it can be said that your solicitor should have identified matters, and the test is what a reasonably competent solicitor should have advised about, there is the possibility of a professional negligence claim.
What we do not understand for your comment and which will be very relevant to matters is what you hope to achieve. The law exists primarily to compensate those wronged. This is normally done with an order for damages. Thought therefore must be given to, in crude terms, how much your claim is worth.
Much of the time, damages in misrepresentation claims are assessed by reference to diminution in value. This is the difference between what the property was worth when it was purchased (normally what the buyer paid) and what someone would pay for it knowing about the issue in question. Whilst we would need input from a surveyor as to this figure, if everything “works” at the property and the risk of problems is relatively low (if this is the case) then we do question what impact on the value of the property there would be.
Delayed completion: what are your options when someone in your chain of property transactions is late? With a group of strangers all working toward completing on the same date, it's a wonder it ever works out on time.
This collection of cases of property misrepresentation claims should remind all of us how important it is to tell the truth on a Property Information Form
Supporting Farleigh Hospice | Limited Places Available We’re delighted to announce that Cunningtons is once again partnering with Farleigh Hospice for the annual Make a Will charity campaign this September! What We’re Offering ✅ Completely FREE Will preparation by our qualified solicitors;✅ Professional legal advice and guidance on making your Will; and of course,✅ Support […]
Hi,
I have an escalating neighbour dispute over a fence that was replaced with a brand new one due to potentially erroneous boundary information on my property information form. Not only that, I strongly believe the previous owner’s were aware that this boundary wasn’t shared as noted on the PIF because they engaged in a similar dispute over the fence with the same neighbour, which must have been resolved one way or the other. This dispute was also not disclosed in the form but while trying to sort a compromise with the neighbour, was clearly tasty enough that they felt compelled to mention that they had to involve the solicitors and local council (a thinly veiled threat).
I did inform the neighbour of my intentions in advance. He told me it wasn’t a shared boundary, it is his but that he was fine with me replacing the fence as it is old. He asked whether I would paint his side and I said I would. I checked the PIF form which stated they are shared and assumed it was just him trying to assert authority (he’s a known problem neighbour). I then went on holiday and while away, the builder’s replaced the fence.
My neighbour is now looking to take me to the cleaner. His 25 year old rotten fence has been replaced with a brand new fence at my expense, however he is insistent that I flip the panels so he gets the ‘front’ side and also paint them brown, as agreed prior. I’ve said as a compromise that I would willingly paint the back. He has refused this offer and has threatened legal action. His only solution is that I flip the fence and paint it brown at my expense. I offered a further compromise of nailing ‘fronts to the back’ which is a technique to make a panel double sided, if he would be willing to contribute. He’s refused this compromise.
Obviously I’m £240+labour down over the fence which is now looking like a questionable investment but I’m also now locked in a really unpleasant dispute with a neighbour and it all originates from the fact I based my decision to proceed off the PIF.
Please advise how I should proceed.
Thank you for your comment.
We cannot provide specific advice on our website. What we can say is that it would always be more cost effective to try and reach a compromise with a difficult neighbour.
Boundary and neighbour disputes almost always quickly become out of hand and can have a long lasting impact on the ability to sell a property, which is probably why your seller was not overly keen to provide information about any historical issues.
The starting point would certainly be to ascertain where the boundary is and whose responsibility this is. Without wishing to sound disparaging, sometimes this comes down to educated guess work on the part of a surveyor if historical deeds are not available. We would also need to consider exactly what was agreed with your neighbour to decide whether the previous agreement reached about replacing the fence has compromised their ability to enforce any rights; it may be that they cannot now do so.
As for the seller, the ability to pursue a misrepresentation claim will depend on the terms of the contract agreed (which may exclude any right to pursue a claim for misrepresentation) and precisely what was said to you about the situation. It is vital to prove that the facts you were given were misleading. Silence about any fact does not ordinarily give rise to the ability to pursue a claim.
Hi there, in a bit of a pickle (very much on topic): I sold a leasehold rental property in 2021. Now years later later, the buyer has come back with a staggering bill for works that were supposedly notified to us via postal S20 notice back in 2020. Never received, possibly the tenants chucked the letters away along with all the spam, who knows. If i ever owed any money to freeholders, they simply chased via email. so I was never too concerned about missing post… until now that is.
During conveyancing in 2021, the freeholders (a major social housing landlord) were explicitly asked by my solicitor to issue all outstanding works notices. They failed to issue anything of the magnitude of the bills in question. There seems to be no other record of this notice from 2020 or since. I also don’t know whether the works were carried out during my ownership or after the sale.
So who’s liable now? The new owner’s solicitor is particularly accusatory and threatening to sue. In fact accusing me of intentionally covering up this S20 notice. I question their professionalism on that front to be honest.
Not sure there’s a straight answer here.. but thank you anyway.
Thank you for your comment.
Sadly this is not an uncommon situation and local authorities in particular can be very slow to issue notices and invoices for major works, which can then come as a huge shock. It does cause all sorts of issues for poor leaseholders looking to buy or sell a property.
The basic position will more than likely than not be that the current owner is liable for the costs. This is why they are so upset. Payments falling due under a lease will generally be payable by the existing tenant.
Sometimes within the contract of sale, especially for leasehold properties, there are apportionment and retention clauses aimed at mitigating or preventing a buyer becoming liable for something the seller “should” be liable for (in the sense that the works are attributable to the seller’s period of ownership). For example, if service charge accounts have not been published at the point of sale and it is therefore unclear how much could owed by the seller and buyer for their period of ownership, the buyer might ask the seller’s solicitor to retain a certain sum from the proceeds of sale on account of this liability. By way of simple explanation, if a service charge is normally about £1,000 per year and the sale takes place halfway through the year, the buyer might ask the seller’s solicitor to hold on to £500, which would be a reasonable estimation of the cost, until the landlord or management company issue their demand for payment. That sum is then passed to the buyer to pay this. Sometimes there is a balancing payment to or from the seller required.
These sorts of clauses need to be considered in detail, so the contractual effect of them can be accounted for. You could be contractually liable for the sum now demanded from your buyer. However, if that were the case, they probably would have argued this already.
It sounds as though you have been accused of misrepresentation. A misrepresentation can be made innocently. For contrast, reckless or fraudulent misrepresentations can also be made. This is why someone does not care about the accuracy of what they say or knows what they are saying is untrue, respectively.
An innocent misrepresentation is still actionable. Whilst it is sometimes a defence to say what was said was substantially true (which might be relevant here), it is generally no defence to say that I represented something believing it to be true. If you are going to represent something, it should be done accurately.
The contract of sale may contain (and it usually does) a clause excluding liability for all but reckless or fraudulent misrepresentations, which may be why you are being accused of trying to conceal matters, to avoid this contractual agreement having any effect on your potential liability.
Where a defence (possibly a secondary defence after the point above regarding contractual liability for innocent misrepresentation) to this matter lies might also be in the question of reliance. See our article: https://cunningtons.co.uk/reliance-in-misrepresentation/
The buyer must have relied on what was said when deciding to proceed with the purchase. It is also generally not a defence to argue the buyer could have discovered the truth, but if it can be shown that on the information provided it could not possibly have been the case that the buyer relied on the implied suggestion that there would be no future liability to them in respect of what is now claimed, this would likely carry considerable weight in a Court.
We suggest you get in touch with us as soon as possible to discuss the matter further.
Hi
The seller has admitted to repeatdly lieing in the Commercial Pre Contractural Enquiries Form, and other direct written communication with him.
We have bought the property £495,000 based on the information the seller gave, he lied about sole water connection and how many people connected to the sewage treatment plant. We do not have a sole
water connection and we have discovered a Deed of Easement for another property to connect to our sewage treatment Plant, our Solicitor failed to report on.
How are we protected by the Law in this instance?
Thank you for your comment.
We cannot give specific advice on our website.
Whether or not there is a misrepresentation claim against your seller will depend on the contractual terms agreed and what was specifically told to you by the seller. If it was factually inaccurate and you relied on this when entering into the agreement to purchase the property, there may be a misrepresentation claim.
Likewise, if it can be said that your solicitor should have identified matters, and the test is what a reasonably competent solicitor should have advised about, there is the possibility of a professional negligence claim.
What we do not understand for your comment and which will be very relevant to matters is what you hope to achieve. The law exists primarily to compensate those wronged. This is normally done with an order for damages. Thought therefore must be given to, in crude terms, how much your claim is worth.
Much of the time, damages in misrepresentation claims are assessed by reference to diminution in value. This is the difference between what the property was worth when it was purchased (normally what the buyer paid) and what someone would pay for it knowing about the issue in question. Whilst we would need input from a surveyor as to this figure, if everything “works” at the property and the risk of problems is relatively low (if this is the case) then we do question what impact on the value of the property there would be.