416 thoughts on “My Seller Lied To Me! When Is It Property Misrepresentation?”
I had my snagging visit to a new build property I’m due to complete on imminently, only to find the much highlighted Induction hob was nothing of the sort. But was in fact just a nasty ceramic one. Given this was in writing in the property description do i have any grounds for redress?
Thank you for your comment. If you have exchanged contracts, then the contract is the most important document to consider, along with the description of the property contained in it which might specifically refer to separate designs or finishes. Unfortunately we would not be able to give you any guidance on what legal redress you may have without considering the contractual and other documentation itself. Put simply, if there is a claim for breach of contract or misrepresentation, it will depend on what you were told, normally in writing, and what was contractually agreed.
It would not be unusual for a new build contract to contain a clause enabling the developer to make non-material changes to the property or fittings, provided is has no material impact on the value of it. The reason for this is to avoid situations where, for example, particular items or materials are not available and suitable alternatives have to be provided. It would prevent a situation where completion could not take place as a result of a minor deviation from the agreed design or plan.
Your best course of action at this stage would certainly be to politely ask the developer to replace the hob with what was contractually agreed and you were led to believe would be installed. They may very well be amenable to this to avoid the aggravation of a potential claim and a potential refusal to complete. With the latter, we would strongly advise refusing to complete. Whilst the cost of replacing the hob may be unwelcome, it is unlikely to be worth incurring the potential cost of being served with notice to complete and the consequences which can follow from this.
Hello. I know this isn’t the ideal place but you seem to be giving good legal advice here so it’s worth a shot.
About a year ago I purchased a leasehold property. I was informed by the estate agent that I would have to pay a service charge, and ground rent. I was specifically told the service charge would cover the property insurance.
Upon buying the property, my solicitor did not once mention or inform me of the property insurance. Again, only mentioning the service charge and ground rent. A year later I receive a letter saying I have not been paying property insurance and it must be paid + additional fees. The property insurance is quite expensive, on top of the other monthly charges, likely would have influenced my decision to buy the property. It would also make the property harder to sell than I imagined due to not knowing about this extra charge.
Would there be any legal case in this? I have been completely failed to be informed of this charge by any party involved. And I also feel like I was misled by the estate agent prior to putting in an offer on the property.
We are unable to provide legal advice. We can only provide general guidance which shouldn’t be considered a substitute for bespoke and considered legal advice.
There are a few things which you can consider.
Firstly, you should check the terms of your lease. There should be a provision in it entitling the landlord to charge the insurance back to leaseholders.
Secondly, if there is an issue with respect to amount you are paying under the lease by way of insurance or other service charges, this may be capable of challenge; they must be “reasonable”. Ultimately, the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) can be asked to make a decision about whether or not the charges are reasonable.
The Section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 states that a service charge is an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to rent. The Act also give tenants the right to request information about the service charges and inspect accounts. In relation to insurance in particular, Section 30A of the Act allows a tenant to ask for a summary of the insurance cover. This may be of use if you want to consider the amount being paid for the insurance if you consider this unreasonable.
As for a claim against your solicitor, it would be necessary to consider the solicitor’s retainer and what the solicitor agreed to advise you on contractually. On the assumption that they agreed (expressly or impliedly) to advise you on the terms of the lease in this respect, this duty would normally discharged by providing a client with a copy of the Leasehold Property Enquiries, or LPE1 form. There is a section within this form which deals with insurance for the building. If you were not provided with this form, then there is a possibility that there is a claim for professional negligence. However, this would not be the end of the story. It would be necessary to consider what your loss is. The loss would be that which flows naturally from the negligence and in this case, the opportunity to negotiate the purchase price. It would be necessary to consider what prospect you had of negotiating the sale price and what that agreed figure would have been.
As for any claim against the estate agent, we consider this unlikely. There is normally a contractual clause agreeing to exclude all but written correspondence from the contract.
We note that you state that it has been alleged that you have not been paying the insurance. You should have received a demand for this and if not you, the seller. If you were expressly informed in the pre-contract stage of the transaction that there were no arrears, then there could be a claim for misrepresentation against the seller for that proportion now demanded which relates to the seller’s period of ownership.
My property (a 70s bungalow in Scotland) is proceeding to sale. The buyers live 200 miles away and have only viewed once. I recently completed the SSC form (similar to the TA6) where I was asked to confirm that all systems/appliances are working commensurate with age. I confirmed yes but (the form kept repeating that the buyer could sue the seller if he/she fails to disclose) stated that the property (a bungalow at the top of a hill) has low hot water pressure. I have since had the pressure tested by the water authority who state it is acceptable. I told my solicitor and have left it at that. In the interim, my buyers have asked no questions but I am worrying myself sick over what constitutes ‘disclosure’. I would have assumed that the onus is on the buyers to test/ask about water pressure etc? (if they do, not sure what I will say). I’m getting a plumber round to see if there’s a quick way to improve the water flow but other than that, what would you advise?
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 had my snagging visit to a new build property I’m due to complete on imminently, only to find the much highlighted Induction hob was nothing of the sort. But was in fact just a nasty ceramic one. Given this was in writing in the property description do i have any grounds for redress?
Thank you for your comment. If you have exchanged contracts, then the contract is the most important document to consider, along with the description of the property contained in it which might specifically refer to separate designs or finishes. Unfortunately we would not be able to give you any guidance on what legal redress you may have without considering the contractual and other documentation itself. Put simply, if there is a claim for breach of contract or misrepresentation, it will depend on what you were told, normally in writing, and what was contractually agreed.
It would not be unusual for a new build contract to contain a clause enabling the developer to make non-material changes to the property or fittings, provided is has no material impact on the value of it. The reason for this is to avoid situations where, for example, particular items or materials are not available and suitable alternatives have to be provided. It would prevent a situation where completion could not take place as a result of a minor deviation from the agreed design or plan.
Your best course of action at this stage would certainly be to politely ask the developer to replace the hob with what was contractually agreed and you were led to believe would be installed. They may very well be amenable to this to avoid the aggravation of a potential claim and a potential refusal to complete. With the latter, we would strongly advise refusing to complete. Whilst the cost of replacing the hob may be unwelcome, it is unlikely to be worth incurring the potential cost of being served with notice to complete and the consequences which can follow from this.
Hello.
I know this isn’t the ideal place but you seem to be giving good legal advice here so it’s worth a shot.
About a year ago I purchased a leasehold property. I was informed by the estate agent that I would have to pay a service charge, and ground rent. I was specifically told the service charge would cover the property insurance.
Upon buying the property, my solicitor did not once mention or inform me of the property insurance. Again, only mentioning the service charge and ground rent. A year later I receive a letter saying I have not been paying property insurance and it must be paid + additional fees. The property insurance is quite expensive, on top of the other monthly charges, likely would have influenced my decision to buy the property. It would also make the property harder to sell than I imagined due to not knowing about this extra charge.
Would there be any legal case in this? I have been completely failed to be informed of this charge by any party involved. And I also feel like I was misled by the estate agent prior to putting in an offer on the property.
Thank you for your comment Jason.
We are unable to provide legal advice. We can only provide general guidance which shouldn’t be considered a substitute for bespoke and considered legal advice.
There are a few things which you can consider.
Firstly, you should check the terms of your lease. There should be a provision in it entitling the landlord to charge the insurance back to leaseholders.
Secondly, if there is an issue with respect to amount you are paying under the lease by way of insurance or other service charges, this may be capable of challenge; they must be “reasonable”. Ultimately, the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) can be asked to make a decision about whether or not the charges are reasonable.
The Section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 states that a service charge is an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to rent. The Act also give tenants the right to request information about the service charges and inspect accounts. In relation to insurance in particular, Section 30A of the Act allows a tenant to ask for a summary of the insurance cover. This may be of use if you want to consider the amount being paid for the insurance if you consider this unreasonable.
As for a claim against your solicitor, it would be necessary to consider the solicitor’s retainer and what the solicitor agreed to advise you on contractually. On the assumption that they agreed (expressly or impliedly) to advise you on the terms of the lease in this respect, this duty would normally discharged by providing a client with a copy of the Leasehold Property Enquiries, or LPE1 form. There is a section within this form which deals with insurance for the building. If you were not provided with this form, then there is a possibility that there is a claim for professional negligence. However, this would not be the end of the story. It would be necessary to consider what your loss is. The loss would be that which flows naturally from the negligence and in this case, the opportunity to negotiate the purchase price. It would be necessary to consider what prospect you had of negotiating the sale price and what that agreed figure would have been.
As for any claim against the estate agent, we consider this unlikely. There is normally a contractual clause agreeing to exclude all but written correspondence from the contract.
We note that you state that it has been alleged that you have not been paying the insurance. You should have received a demand for this and if not you, the seller. If you were expressly informed in the pre-contract stage of the transaction that there were no arrears, then there could be a claim for misrepresentation against the seller for that proportion now demanded which relates to the seller’s period of ownership.
My property (a 70s bungalow in Scotland) is proceeding to sale. The buyers live 200 miles away and have only viewed once. I recently completed the SSC form (similar to the TA6) where I was asked to confirm that all systems/appliances are working commensurate with age. I confirmed yes but (the form kept repeating that the buyer could sue the seller if he/she fails to disclose) stated that the property (a bungalow at the top of a hill) has low hot water pressure. I have since had the pressure tested by the water authority who state it is acceptable. I told my solicitor and have left it at that.
In the interim, my buyers have asked no questions but I am worrying myself sick over what constitutes ‘disclosure’.
I would have assumed that the onus is on the buyers to test/ask about water pressure etc? (if they do, not sure what I will say).
I’m getting a plumber round to see if there’s a quick way to improve the water flow but other than that, what would you advise?
Thanks in advance.
Thank you for your question.
Unfortunately we are unable to provide any guidance on Scottish Law. This is something you should discuss with your existing solicitor.