Advanced search

House buying hassle

(12 Posts)
GettinTrimmer Sun 05-Jun-11 18:27:25

We are moving, close to being able to exchange contracts, it is an executor sale and the executors have recently lost their parent, his house we are buying.

Our solicitor is adamant that the sellers need to pay for a Restrictive Covenant Indemnity Policy for us. On the deeds it says no alterations/extentions, and there have been a couple of extentions. Their solicitors have advised them not to pay it as the builders who placed the covenant are no longer trading.

They've batted this to and fro, and I had a call from the estate agent requesting that I instruct my solicitor to drop the matter as it is causing distress to the executors and it's a waste of time. I felt awful they are upset while grieving.

Our solicitor is saying it is needed to be able to progress with the purchase and protect the lender's interest.

We have asked if they are happy to go 50/50, but if we were to instruct our solicitor to not pursue this any further, does that mean she will not be able to complete on the property? confused Also, I assume our lender would not be satisfied - potentially someone could try and bring about legal action? How would they be able to do that if the builders are no longer trading? Our solicitor is saying this could still happen.

Thanks to anyone who can reply to this!

sneezecakesmum Sun 05-Jun-11 19:56:08

Can't offer anything except to say house buying is sh*t and enough to get you curled up rocking in a corner! You have my sympathy sad

PatientGriselda Sun 05-Jun-11 20:20:10

I think you have to chose between paying it yourself and walking away from the hose altogether. Could you afford to pay for it yourself if you had to?

PatientGriselda Sun 05-Jun-11 20:20:35

Choose and house, I meant.

PatientGriselda Sun 05-Jun-11 20:22:47

Sorry, I re-read and see that that isn't really what you were asking.

whomovedmychocolate Sun 05-Jun-11 20:25:32

Okay, you have several choices here. You can say: (1) without this policy the house is worth X thousand pounds less so we are reducing our offer accordingly. (2) We are sorry if the family is distressed but they will be more so if they have to remarket the house, this is our position and it's a dealbreaker.

I think the solicitor is being an arse contacting your directly frankly rather than through your solicitor.

The reason this is really important is that let's say someone came along and complained about the extension and that was investigated by the freeholder (I'm assuming this is a leasehold), you could be ordered to take down the extensions entirely within 30 days.

nocake Mon 06-Jun-11 12:42:29

That it is an executor sale is of no importance, other than it taking longer to get all the vendors to agree. I think your solicitor is wrong to insist on an indemnity policy because there is no-one who can enforce the covenant but they are just covering their @rse. If you don't think it is necessary you could contact your lender and ask their opinion. They might not care, in which case you can tell your solicitor to drop it.

Gonzo33 Mon 06-Jun-11 13:02:19

Normally if your lender has an issue regarding this matter it would be as a condition of the mortgage, if it is not a condition that need's to be satisfied prior to completion then I doubt the lender gives a hoot. Give them a call and find out if you don't have a copy of the mortgage offer.

I agree with nocake I think the solicitor is probably trying to cover themselves.

Blu Mon 06-Jun-11 13:07:59

Do not forget that the EA is acting for the vendors, not you.
The sale is in sad circumstances for them, but that should not affect any of your decision making.
Don't know wnything about covenants / indemnity, though.

Ask your solicitor to list for you the specific risks of what could happen if you do not have this cover, and how the status of the builders (i.e not trading) may or may not affect that.

GettinTrimmer Mon 06-Jun-11 14:00:21

thanks all for replies. I have found out the cost of this stupid policy - it is £140. If they don't pay half it's not worth quibbling about.

Will have a look on the mortgage offer, thanks.

sad But I just wish they had just shut up and paid up. Dh was never 100% about the house, this has stirred up his feelings and he's unhappy about moving there as he's just focusing on the negatives. I won't let our buyers down I've told him we'll move out and rent.

sneezecakes I sympathise also with your dd.

whomovedmychocolate Mon 06-Jun-11 14:11:18

Look you CAN reduce your offer by £140 if it's the dealbreaker for your DH - they would have to be MAD to walk away over £140.

sneezecakesmum Mon 06-Jun-11 20:40:53

Thank you for your sympathy Gettintrim but things took an upward swing for DD as posted on my thread!

Regarding the indemnity policy - my son also had to take one of these out when he sold his house because the attic conversion did not follow building regs and couldnt be advertised as an extra bedroom. As you say £70 is not worth arguing about when the overall cost is taken into account, expecially all the expense you already have had. DD was looking at losing £400 to pull out (hopefully not happening now!)

As for your DH having second thoughts sad what a nightmare! Its all about weighing up the pros and cons of houses. Maybe his reservations are justified? Maybe you can talk them through and he'll see that this house is right when every factor is weighed up? Women fall in love with houses - I think maybe men are more pragmatic hmm or is that sexist!

DD and SIL originally had another house they were buying but there was a dispute over a wall with the neighbour with lots of implications so they pulled out on the friday, saw this new house on sunday viewed and put in an offer (accepted) on the monday! Looking back the first house was not really right for them and SIL had reservations all along, he was right! damn!

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: