26 thoughts on “Property Information Form: 7 Key Issues You Should Watch Out For”
My seller, investigator and realtor have all been in on the same cover up in regards to the sale of my home and there was so much that was not disclosed and covered up because they were all in on the same deal and receiving something in return that they refused to disclose things that came to light 💡 and I was unaware of until the insurance company asked me something about it later on that I should have known about but, was unaware that they had covered it up to make it look like it was a new roof and it wasn’t it was just a patch job that they had done to make it look like it was new. Plus there was a huge hole in the roof and they didn’t fix it and they only covered it up. So now I’m having trouble with the house all these years later, or really I’ve been in the house for about a year and a half and all of these problems are starting to come up that weren’t even apparent until now and I just don’t know what to do about it because it’s not even covered by anything.
We are not certain precisely what the issue is, but we assume that repairs had been undertaken to the
roof of the property that you were proposing to purchase and this was not disclosed to you.
The basic position is that it is the remit of a buyer’s seller to check that the property is in a condition that
is satisfactory to their buyer client. It isn’t generally for a seller, seller’s estate agent or the solicitors
(who are not surveyors) to point this out.
Concealing issues with a property is not uncommon. A seller will want to get the best price they can for
it. It is generally up to a buyer to ask the questions that they want answers to as to the condition of the
property. Sometimes, if an answer is given, which may in itself be factually accurate but because of
something which is also relevant is not explained, it creates a misleading situation and the buyer knows
this, this can give rise to a basis of claim in misrepresentation. Concealment of relevant issues can
sometimes be evidence of this but would not in itself give rise to a claim unless there was a
corresponding obligation to disclose the underlying issue which has been concealed (which there
generally isn’t).
We purchased a property on a private road where the ownership is restricted to the land the house sits upon and the surrounding parking and gardens are ‘communal’ and managed by a company in which you become a member upon purchase. There is an annual maintenance fee of £1000.00 for each property for the parking, pavements and gardens. The gardens are maintained by contractors. However, over time, one end property has decided to replace planting and deck out an area for seating which they now treat as ‘theirs’. How is this compatible with the surrounding properties being regularly sold as being in ‘communal’ gardens?
We cannot give legal advice on our website, if only for the fact that the relevant deeds and title documentation in relation to the properties would have to be considered.
On the assumption that there is a validly enforceable restriction, perhaps a restrictive covenant, then arguably denying those individuals with the benefit of such restriction their ability to exercise their rights in relation to communal land, this would give rise to an actionable cause of action. It strikes us that the remedy sought would need to be an injunction obliging the infringing individuals to reinstate that which they have sought to acquire for themselves.
I haven’t had it surveyed (yet) however the surveyor did some due diligence before arranging a visit.
It turns out there was work performed in 1992 on the property as documented on the building control website. This was done BEFORE the seller moved in.
However from the photos he also noticed that similar was performed on other walls in the kitchen (archway) etc with a beam above. This work has not been documented with building control.
As this was perhaps done before the moved in the early 2000’s, what should I do?
There is no paper work on building control for this, they might not even know themselves that this work was done.
As a buyer what would some good guidance be ?
I have been reading up that you can get retrospective building control but obviously risks to this if it’s knocked back. It can delay the sale (fine by me) or the seller could pull out altogether I’m guessing if it requires that the work is restored to its original state
Equally indemnity insurance would only cover me for work requested from the council, and not for any future repairs of said refurbishment.
As it wasn’t the seller that initiated this work though how can I navigate this effectively ?
A solicitor would be unlikely to advise you whether or not to proceed with the transaction, unless they were specifically retained to advise you on the financial merits of it. Whether or not to proceed is ultimately your choice based on your appetite for risk. Normally, the extent of a solicitor’s obligations would be to identify risk involved in the transaction that would not be obvious to their client, rather than advise whether or not proceeding was a good or bad idea.
It sounds as though your surveyor is on the ball and very much worth whatever fees are being paid to them. Likewise, if you have been advised about the possibility of indemnity insurance (often a common “solution” to such issues), then your conveyancer is alive to the risks to you and has advised you of your options. However, ultimately the decision to proceed or not is yours alone based on their professional advice.
What we can say is that the basic position is “buyer beware” and it is therefore up to the buyer to obtain the necessary information that they require and decide whether or not to proceed. This normally means asking the seller the right questions and consulting with professional advisors about the position. This is the primary reason for appointing professional advisers. Whilst there is a cost involved, it is always worth it to minimise the risk of becoming committed to purchase a property which has issues which may be of concern to a buyer. A buyer would be well advised not to assume that there is any sort of recourse to the seller (or any other third party) after the transaction completes and therefore should be taking whatever steps they can to address points that are of concern to them. A client should never feel that they cannot ask questions of their professional advisors, because that is what they are for, but as mentioned, whether or not to proceed is likely to be a matter for you based on the information you can obtain and the professional advice about the risks given to you.
You’ve found your dream home. The survey’s done. Your solicitor has the searches back. Everyone’s ready to exchange contracts. And then someone in the chain pulls out. In our earlier article on delayed completion, we looked at what happens when things go wrong after contracts are exchanged. But what about when the chain breaks before […]
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.
My seller, investigator and realtor have all been in on the same cover up in regards to the sale of my home and there was so much that was not disclosed and covered up because they were all in on the same deal and receiving something in return that they refused to disclose things that came to light 💡 and I was unaware of until the insurance company asked me something about it later on that I should have known about but, was unaware that they had covered it up to make it look like it was a new roof and it wasn’t it was just a patch job that they had done to make it look like it was new. Plus there was a huge hole in the roof and they didn’t fix it and they only covered it up. So now I’m having trouble with the house all these years later, or really I’ve been in the house for about a year and a half and all of these problems are starting to come up that weren’t even apparent until now and I just don’t know what to do about it because it’s not even covered by anything.
Thank you for your comment.
We are not certain precisely what the issue is, but we assume that repairs had been undertaken to the
roof of the property that you were proposing to purchase and this was not disclosed to you.
The basic position is that it is the remit of a buyer’s seller to check that the property is in a condition that
is satisfactory to their buyer client. It isn’t generally for a seller, seller’s estate agent or the solicitors
(who are not surveyors) to point this out.
Concealing issues with a property is not uncommon. A seller will want to get the best price they can for
it. It is generally up to a buyer to ask the questions that they want answers to as to the condition of the
property. Sometimes, if an answer is given, which may in itself be factually accurate but because of
something which is also relevant is not explained, it creates a misleading situation and the buyer knows
this, this can give rise to a basis of claim in misrepresentation. Concealment of relevant issues can
sometimes be evidence of this but would not in itself give rise to a claim unless there was a
corresponding obligation to disclose the underlying issue which has been concealed (which there
generally isn’t).
We purchased a property on a private road where the ownership is restricted to the land the house sits upon and the surrounding parking and gardens are ‘communal’ and managed by a company in which you become a member upon purchase. There is an annual maintenance fee of £1000.00 for each property for the parking, pavements and gardens. The gardens are maintained by contractors. However, over time, one end property has decided to replace planting and deck out an area for seating which they now treat as ‘theirs’. How is this compatible with the surrounding properties being regularly sold as being in ‘communal’ gardens?
Thank you for your comment.
We cannot give legal advice on our website, if only for the fact that the relevant deeds and title documentation in relation to the properties would have to be considered.
On the assumption that there is a validly enforceable restriction, perhaps a restrictive covenant, then arguably denying those individuals with the benefit of such restriction their ability to exercise their rights in relation to communal land, this would give rise to an actionable cause of action. It strikes us that the remedy sought would need to be an injunction obliging the infringing individuals to reinstate that which they have sought to acquire for themselves.
Hi,
I’m in the process of buying a property.
I haven’t had it surveyed (yet) however the surveyor did some due diligence before arranging a visit.
It turns out there was work performed in 1992 on the property as documented on the building control website. This was done BEFORE the seller moved in.
However from the photos he also noticed that similar was performed on other walls in the kitchen (archway) etc with a beam above. This work has not been documented with building control.
As this was perhaps done before the moved in the early 2000’s, what should I do?
There is no paper work on building control for this, they might not even know themselves that this work was done.
As a buyer what would some good guidance be ?
I have been reading up that you can get retrospective building control but obviously risks to this if it’s knocked back. It can delay the sale (fine by me) or the seller could pull out altogether I’m guessing if it requires that the work is restored to its original state
Equally indemnity insurance would only cover me for work requested from the council, and not for any future repairs of said refurbishment.
As it wasn’t the seller that initiated this work though how can I navigate this effectively ?
Thank you in advance
Thank you for your comment.
A solicitor would be unlikely to advise you whether or not to proceed with the transaction, unless they were specifically retained to advise you on the financial merits of it. Whether or not to proceed is ultimately your choice based on your appetite for risk. Normally, the extent of a solicitor’s obligations would be to identify risk involved in the transaction that would not be obvious to their client, rather than advise whether or not proceeding was a good or bad idea.
It sounds as though your surveyor is on the ball and very much worth whatever fees are being paid to them. Likewise, if you have been advised about the possibility of indemnity insurance (often a common “solution” to such issues), then your conveyancer is alive to the risks to you and has advised you of your options. However, ultimately the decision to proceed or not is yours alone based on their professional advice.
What we can say is that the basic position is “buyer beware” and it is therefore up to the buyer to obtain the necessary information that they require and decide whether or not to proceed. This normally means asking the seller the right questions and consulting with professional advisors about the position. This is the primary reason for appointing professional advisers. Whilst there is a cost involved, it is always worth it to minimise the risk of becoming committed to purchase a property which has issues which may be of concern to a buyer. A buyer would be well advised not to assume that there is any sort of recourse to the seller (or any other third party) after the transaction completes and therefore should be taking whatever steps they can to address points that are of concern to them. A client should never feel that they cannot ask questions of their professional advisors, because that is what they are for, but as mentioned, whether or not to proceed is likely to be a matter for you based on the information you can obtain and the professional advice about the risks given to you.