191 thoughts on “Property Misrepresentation Claims in Practice”
I recently purchased a property in a multi-unit building where some units have balconies installed overlooking the canal that is located at the rear of the property. The estate agent ad for the property mentions that a balcony can be installed by the buyer should they choose to do so. After moving into the property and enquiring about balcony installation, I was informed that a balcony cannot be installed in my unit due to local council controls.
I would not have purchased the property had I known that a balcony installation was not allowed. The property value is also no longer as high with this limitation. In my meetings with the estate agent, it was discussed that it was an option. However, this item was not brought up in the conveyance process.
Do I have a legal recourse for this misinformation?
If you consider that the description of the property was misleading, then you may want to consider approaching any redress scheme that the estate agent may belong to, such as the Property Ombudsman. However, we are hesitant to suggest that there would be any sort of claim here against the agent. The role of an estate agent is of course to find a buyer and whilst the advertising should not be misleading, it would still remain the obligation of a buyer to satisfy themselves as to what they were purchasing.
It is the role of your solicitor to raise pertinent enquiries with the seller and to identify and supply to you relevant documentation and information in accordance with your instructions. If you had instructed your solicitor to check that a balcony could be constructed and the response was “yes” when the information and documentation that they had showed that this was not the case (such as a planning or other restriction identified in searches), there may be a negligence claim.
If you did not expressly instruct your solicitor to check the position and on the assumption that they could have identified restrictions preventing the construction of a balcony, whether they had a duty to advise you on the position will turn heavily on the “scope of the retainer”. A solicitor’s retainer is the contract between it and its client. It says what the solicitor is going to do and is therefore relevant to the obligations of the solicitor and what the solicitor should be advising their client about.
If a solicitor’s retainer is silent on whether or not advice on a particular point should be given, it would be necessary to show that it was reasonably incidental to the work the solicitor agreed to do that advice on the particular point would be given. Put in very blunt terms, the question would be to what extent should the solicitor have known about your intentions to construct a balcony and therefore to what extent should advice have been given to you on the point.
If you would like to consider the position in more detail with us, please feel free to get in touch.
I purchased a property on the 17th of June and within just two days I started to uncover the start of a huge problem which appears to have been covered up by the seller. The property is a leasehold ground floor Victorian conversion flat. Two flats above me. I did a homebuyers report which discovered a damp reading which I explored further with two damp companies. Both confirmed damp readings in kitchen and the second confirmed damp in bathroom and speculative wet rot but could only confirm unless the flooring came up. Close to completion we negotiated a final price to include remediation game these issues but the seller was adamant there was no wet rot as based on their experience of laying down laminate flooring. He claimed “we dispute the wet rot and this is highly improbable from our experience. We will not be contributing towards something which is speculative!” They then threatened to put the flat back on the market if we didn’t move forward with their final offer (covering just damp remedy) within 24 hours.
They sounded genuine so I agreed.
Another point to mention is that they also had drainage repairs done a year ago by the freeholder which used up all the money in the sinking fund. This was to investigate foul smells and a blocked drain. The work was carried out with no further complaints or history of ongoing work so appeared resolved.
The day after completion I collected my keys and noticed the sellers had taken absolutely everything not on the inventory list – from waste bins to toilet brush holder. I found it bizarre though that they purchased new plug in air fresheners and plugged these in all around the house. Two days later I had a drain fly infestation under my stairs cupboard which is opposite the kitchen. I did not realise these were drain flies at this stage and put it down to the fact that the microwave and freezer were in this cupboard and so there may be some rotting food in here. At this point I also removed the air fresheners and soon discovered a very pungent stale damp stench. A day later I removed the kitchen tiles to lay new ones down and to my horror thousands of drain flies emerged from underneath and a soaking wet floor. The dishwasher and washing machine were moved but it was evident there were surface leaks from pipe work here which would have been impossible for sellers to miss. I then removed the underlay tiles and the wood was all rotten underneath with holes and a lot of it had crumbled. There was a leak coming in from my toilet next door and my bathroom and kitchen sink all congregating under the floor boards. The damp reading of course wasn’t rising damp – it was this leak that had been congregating under my floor for what appeared a very long time!
I’ve now called the water company and they found a blocked drain which they cleared. This stopped the leak but suggested there is a possibility of more faulty pipe work because otherwise the blocked pipe would just send water back up my toilet and sink with nowhere to go. The fact that it was leaking under my floorboards suggests there could be more faulty drainage hidden in the system. A drain engineer advised I’d need to take off all the flooring and in my bathroom to investigate as otherwise it would be impossible to confirm the issue had been resolved. He also highlighted the possibly if the wet rot in the bathroom was quite high and could most certainly have spread to other parts of the flat.
I spoke to the tenants upstairs and they claimed they’d spoken to the flat owners about the drain flies last year and the owners said they had a drain issue and their flat had a lot of drain flies inside. An engineer was going to be called out. I have transcripts of this conversation
Do you know what my rights are here? The freeholder is looking into the issue but I have been sold a flat where there has been a major issue covered up. This is all too much of a coincidence to happen in just two weeks after my purchase.
Another thing to note is that the flat went up for sale just two months after the previous attempt to resolve the issue and this cleared the entire sinking fund balance. My assumption is that they put the flat on the market knowing they have a huge issue which could cost a lot of money to sort.
From what you have written, we would be hesitant to suggest that there is a claim. For a misrepresentation claim to exist, there must be “reliance” on a “statement of fact”. A “statement of opinion” is not generally actionable. Someone’s opinion of something leaves room for doubt. Someone providing a categorical confirmation of the facts of a matter is different.
From what you have described, the seller arguably provided their opinion on your findings, rather than expressly stating that the property did not suffer from the problems that you have now found. It would be necessary to consider all of the information and exchanges between the parties during the transaction to form a better view but if what you have described is all that the seller said about the position, whether or not a Court considers the statement one of fact or opinion would be a risk factor in any claim.
We bought a property recently with plenty of renovation work (we knew that).
However, we very quickly realised (after less than a week) that there is a big issue with a neighbour that is showing clear signs of antisocial behaviour. This goes from putting extremely loud music day and night, throwing stuff on the road, insulting people from his doorstep, to even being outside with a knife (he got arrested for that but then released).
This is not a one time event and it happens on a regular basis. I suspect the previous owners moved out / sold at least partly because of that. Is that something they should have disclosed in the TA6? I really believe the property was mis sold since it is impossible to « not know » that someone is screaming under your window at night. If we had to sell the property today, we feel we would need to disclose it hence leading to a loss in value.
There may be a possible claim directly against your neighbour for nuisance.
As for any claim against the sellers, this will depend on what you were told about the situation. A seller is under no obligation to volunteer information about a property. However, if they do not provide information, then the chances of a purchaser agreeing to proceed are slim. Therefore standard forms, which include the TA6 or Seller’s Property Information Form, are commonly used to facilitate the exchange of information, but it is not obligatory for the seller to complete this or any other form or specifically point out that they have nuisance neighbours.
The Property Information Form ordinarily contains a question about disputes with neighbours. If there was an ongoing dispute and the seller has stated that there was not, there may be a claim for misrepresentation. However, if the seller has not expressly said, and this would normally have to be in writing, that there were “no problems” with the neighbours or something else regarding the situation which is factually inaccurate, there is unlikely to be any sort of claim.
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 […]
Planning for the future as we get older is a vital part of life – that’s why many of us provide for ourselves with pensions and Wills. However, one of the most important tools available to us is often neglected: Lasting Powers of Attorney. According to CanadaLife UK, 78% of UK adults don’t have a […]
Cunningtons help with "Your Legal Journey Through Life". We cover key areas: your first home, your relationships and family law, then growing families, employment matters, dispute resolutions, property investments, and planning your estate. We focus on continuity, trust, understanding clients, and personal service by offering the same legal team throughout life.
I recently purchased a property in a multi-unit building where some units have balconies installed overlooking the canal that is located at the rear of the property. The estate agent ad for the property mentions that a balcony can be installed by the buyer should they choose to do so. After moving into the property and enquiring about balcony installation, I was informed that a balcony cannot be installed in my unit due to local council controls.
I would not have purchased the property had I known that a balcony installation was not allowed. The property value is also no longer as high with this limitation. In my meetings with the estate agent, it was discussed that it was an option. However, this item was not brought up in the conveyance process.
Do I have a legal recourse for this misinformation?
If you consider that the description of the property was misleading, then you may want to consider approaching any redress scheme that the estate agent may belong to, such as the Property Ombudsman. However, we are hesitant to suggest that there would be any sort of claim here against the agent. The role of an estate agent is of course to find a buyer and whilst the advertising should not be misleading, it would still remain the obligation of a buyer to satisfy themselves as to what they were purchasing.
It is the role of your solicitor to raise pertinent enquiries with the seller and to identify and supply to you relevant documentation and information in accordance with your instructions. If you had instructed your solicitor to check that a balcony could be constructed and the response was “yes” when the information and documentation that they had showed that this was not the case (such as a planning or other restriction identified in searches), there may be a negligence claim.
If you did not expressly instruct your solicitor to check the position and on the assumption that they could have identified restrictions preventing the construction of a balcony, whether they had a duty to advise you on the position will turn heavily on the “scope of the retainer”. A solicitor’s retainer is the contract between it and its client. It says what the solicitor is going to do and is therefore relevant to the obligations of the solicitor and what the solicitor should be advising their client about.
If a solicitor’s retainer is silent on whether or not advice on a particular point should be given, it would be necessary to show that it was reasonably incidental to the work the solicitor agreed to do that advice on the particular point would be given. Put in very blunt terms, the question would be to what extent should the solicitor have known about your intentions to construct a balcony and therefore to what extent should advice have been given to you on the point.
If you would like to consider the position in more detail with us, please feel free to get in touch.
I purchased a property on the 17th of June and within just two days I started to uncover the start of a huge problem which appears to have been covered up by the seller.
The property is a leasehold ground floor Victorian conversion flat. Two flats above me. I did a homebuyers report which discovered a damp reading which I explored further with two damp companies. Both confirmed damp readings in kitchen and the second confirmed damp in bathroom and speculative wet rot but could only confirm unless the flooring came up.
Close to completion we negotiated a final price to include remediation game these issues but the seller was adamant there was no wet rot as based on their experience of laying down laminate flooring. He claimed “we dispute the wet rot and this is highly improbable from our experience. We will not be contributing towards something which is speculative!” They then threatened to put the flat back on the market if we didn’t move forward with their final offer (covering just damp remedy) within 24 hours.
They sounded genuine so I agreed.
Another point to mention is that they also had drainage repairs done a year ago by the freeholder which used up all the money in the sinking fund. This was to investigate foul smells and a blocked drain. The work was carried out with no further complaints or history of ongoing work so appeared resolved.
The day after completion I collected my keys and noticed the sellers had taken absolutely everything not on the inventory list – from waste bins to toilet brush holder. I found it bizarre though that they purchased new plug in air fresheners and plugged these in all around the house. Two days later I had a drain fly infestation under my stairs cupboard which is opposite the kitchen. I did not realise these were drain flies at this stage and put it down to the fact that the microwave and freezer were in this cupboard and so there may be some rotting food in here.
At this point I also removed the air fresheners and soon discovered a very pungent stale damp stench.
A day later I removed the kitchen tiles to lay new ones down and to my horror thousands of drain flies emerged from underneath and a soaking wet floor. The dishwasher and washing machine were moved but it was evident there were surface leaks from pipe work here which would have been impossible for sellers to miss. I then removed the underlay tiles and the wood was all rotten underneath with holes and a lot of it had crumbled. There was a leak coming in from my toilet next door and my bathroom and kitchen sink all congregating under the floor boards. The damp reading of course wasn’t rising damp – it was this leak that had been congregating under my floor for what appeared a very long time!
I’ve now called the water company and they found a blocked drain which they cleared. This stopped the leak but suggested there is a possibility of more faulty pipe work because otherwise the blocked pipe would just send water back up my toilet and sink with nowhere to go. The fact that it was leaking under my floorboards suggests there could be more faulty drainage hidden in the system. A drain engineer advised I’d need to take off all the flooring and in my bathroom to investigate as otherwise it would be impossible to confirm the issue had been resolved. He also highlighted the possibly if the wet rot in the bathroom was quite high and could most certainly have spread to other parts of the flat.
I spoke to the tenants upstairs and they claimed they’d spoken to the flat owners about the drain flies last year and the owners said they had a drain issue and their flat had a lot of drain flies inside. An engineer was going to be called out. I have transcripts of this conversation
Do you know what my rights are here? The freeholder is looking into the issue but I have been sold a flat where there has been a major issue covered up. This is all too much of a coincidence to happen in just two weeks after my purchase.
Another thing to note is that the flat went up for sale just two months after the previous attempt to resolve the issue and this cleared the entire sinking fund balance. My assumption is that they put the flat on the market knowing they have a huge issue which could cost a lot of money to sort.
Do I have a legal recourse with this?
Thank you for your comment.
From what you have written, we would be hesitant to suggest that there is a claim. For a misrepresentation claim to exist, there must be “reliance” on a “statement of fact”. A “statement of opinion” is not generally actionable. Someone’s opinion of something leaves room for doubt. Someone providing a categorical confirmation of the facts of a matter is different.
From what you have described, the seller arguably provided their opinion on your findings, rather than expressly stating that the property did not suffer from the problems that you have now found. It would be necessary to consider all of the information and exchanges between the parties during the transaction to form a better view but if what you have described is all that the seller said about the position, whether or not a Court considers the statement one of fact or opinion would be a risk factor in any claim.
Hi,
We bought a property recently with plenty of renovation work (we knew that).
However, we very quickly realised (after less than a week) that there is a big issue with a neighbour that is showing clear signs of antisocial behaviour. This goes from putting extremely loud music day and night, throwing stuff on the road, insulting people from his doorstep, to even being outside with a knife (he got arrested for that but then released).
This is not a one time event and it happens on a regular basis. I suspect the previous owners moved out / sold at least partly because of that. Is that something they should have disclosed in the TA6? I really believe the property was mis sold since it is impossible to « not know » that someone is screaming under your window at night. If we had to sell the property today, we feel we would need to disclose it hence leading to a loss in value.
Is there anything to do?
Thanks and regards,
Nick
Thank you for your enquiry.
There may be a possible claim directly against your neighbour for nuisance.
As for any claim against the sellers, this will depend on what you were told about the situation. A seller is under no obligation to volunteer information about a property. However, if they do not provide information, then the chances of a purchaser agreeing to proceed are slim. Therefore standard forms, which include the TA6 or Seller’s Property Information Form, are commonly used to facilitate the exchange of information, but it is not obligatory for the seller to complete this or any other form or specifically point out that they have nuisance neighbours.
The Property Information Form ordinarily contains a question about disputes with neighbours. If there was an ongoing dispute and the seller has stated that there was not, there may be a claim for misrepresentation. However, if the seller has not expressly said, and this would normally have to be in writing, that there were “no problems” with the neighbours or something else regarding the situation which is factually inaccurate, there is unlikely to be any sort of claim.