Jump to content


legal advice! pls help!


euphoria
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5517 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

hello all (im new to this site)

 

i need some help and advice pls

 

ill explain as best as i can and make it as short and to the point.

 

i put in an offer to purchase a house in scotland, my offer accepted at 102,500K. my financial advisor was uselss, come date of entry and his answer, sorry couldnt get you a mortgage. i went to another company who said they could do it, turn around 2 weeks aprx, so the sellers of the property gave me 2 weeks, we were really close but as the deadline passed again didnt have the money on time. sellers decided to resale, so i was then told that they have now accepted an offer for the same price that i was offering, 102500k.

 

so legally i have to pay any interest thats been built up which is fine, comes to just over a grand at 22 quid a day. now ive got the final breakdown and there asking me to pay 3.5k aprx as the house sold for 100k (meaning a shortfall of 2.5 k which legally i have to pay) HOWEVER, verbally i was told by my solicitor that the new buyers offered the same as me, meaning there is no shortfall, but then they decide to change it to 100k for wotever reason, and im being billed for it!

 

surely, legally that cant be right can it? i mean if thats the case they could have changed it to £0 then id have to stump up over a 100K!!!! yeah right then!

 

so legally wot position am i in? am i right in thinking that if they said initially that there was no shortfall then that should stand shouldnt it?

im gonna email my solicitor tomorow but i would have thought he would have argued this case to begin with?

 

wots everyones views on this? should i have to pay the diference even if theyve changed the price?

 

which office can i contact if i wish to make a complaint( remeber im in scotland) i.e is there an office of fair trading when it comes to this sort of thing or should i accept wot ever my solicitor says?

 

all your help much appreciated.

 

thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read your post and I can't really comment, as my law studies only touched on Scottish Law, and that was criminal - my conveyancing was only based on English law, although there are laws pertaining to the pulling out of a sale, but with regards to how much....I really couldn't say!

 

Sorry for the completely useless post !

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply, i have emailed my solicitor and am awaiting his reply but ive got a feeling hes going to say legally their entitled to accept a reasonable offer and i have to pay the shortfall. but my issue is that they first said theres no shortfall and then they drooped the price by 2.k meaning id have to pay for the difference.

 

can any one adv me here or adv me who to contact for a second oppinion pls

 

thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a sneaky suspicion that the offer they accepted may have been lower to ensure Stamp Duty was avoided (which would have to be paid by the buyer). However, whether this has any relevance to the claim on you I'm not sure, but you'll be able to check the title (and selling price) through LRS (Land Register of Scotland) just in case there is any double-dealing.

 

However, there is a real risk that the vendors decided to settle for the lower amount on the basis of completing a successful sale quickly, but I agree you should not be held liable because of that. It might be prudent to push for more information why the other offer was reduced (how was this info obtained?) Hopefully you'll just get round it by making a formal payment of the costs based on £100k due to 'information received' in full and final settlement of any claim against you. If they don't accept this, they'll then have to prove their actions were reasonable in a court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats great, my solicitor hasnt commented whether what there doing is legal or not, and is going to try and get me out of paying the shortfall. but i dont understand why im in this postion, surely my solicitor should have rejected their claim straightaway? any way, ill find out next week but was just wondering what my next step would be should they insist on me paying up. did a quick search and found that i can complain to the ombudsman after putting my complaint in writting and it hasnt been resolved after 3 months.

 

cheers for the input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think as your paying a solicitor to look after your interest's you wouldn't have to nag them to do that very thing.... but the only person who cares about what you do is you, so don't be surprised. I think what they are doing isn;t so much 'illegal' as sharp practice. Just as the banks offer a reduced amount for a quick settlement to avoid court, there's nothing preventing you from doing the same, as a cheque in the hand instead of litigation is a powerful tool!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not legal advice - not qualified for that - but have a bit of knowledge

 

Once missives are concluded on the sale - you then bind yourself into the contract. If you pull out - which you have - you are liable to pay penalty interest, which is normally 4 or 5% above bank base rate which at the monent is I think 4% equalling 8% - which you know about, also any shortfall in a new offer - readvertisements fees - search fees - and their legal fees all up to the date of entry for the new offer. However, obviously this was sold very quickly and you have not incurred some of these penalties. Stamp duty threshold is £125,000 so it was nothing to do with that.

 

Do not do any dealings with your solicitor over the telephone - do everything in writing, either email or letter. You must demand a breakdown of costs you have incurred from your Solicitor and also a copy of the new contract from the other Sellers. He should have automatically received this from the other side and sent you a copy - the fact they have changed the price, there is nothing you can do, but ensure you see a copy of the offer to ensure that is the price they have offered.

 

If you are unhappy with your Solicitor it is the Law Society of Scotland you must lodge a complaint with, Drumsheugh Gardens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for that dereen, im just going to have to wait for my solicitors response now,

 

when they told me the new offer was the same as mine (no shortfall) this was verbal, then i recieve written statement from solicitor saying now the price is 2.5k less, meaning there is a shortfall. so basically theres nothing in writting saying no shortfall, but there is in writting that there is a short fall. but my solicitor agrees and confirms that verbally they adv us of no shortfall. well just have to wait and see, otherwise i will take this further.

out of curiosity, will a verbal statement stand in court? as my solicitor is a (verbal) witness so to speak

thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be heresay - only if the solicitor corroborated your version that there was no shortfall would this be of any use in court. However, if you were advised there was no shortfall, and now there is, it would make sense to challenge the 'new' information and request an explanation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...