To think previous owners of our new house were being unreasonable?

[TheGrumpyAccountant]

Today was moving day. Having sold our house, we packed up and cleaned yesterday so that we could do a final clean/take last minute stuff today. All of our belongings were out and being stored as of yesterday afternoon. We handed in keys at 10.30am this morning and our funds were transferred to the solicitor of our sellers before 11am. At 1.15pm we were told that we could collect the keys to our new house from their solicitors. When we arrived at the new house the previous occupants were just ‘chilling’ in the house (despite having meant to have handed all keys to their solicitors). Standing with my toddler and newborn, when I (very politely) spoke to them they said that they had not yet been told they could collect their keys for their new house and so refused to leave until they knew they had somewhere to go as if something went wrong they’d have nowhere to go. I pointed out that if they don’t leave WE would have nowhere to go. After some quick calls to lawyers they were told they had to leave, so they eventually did.

We are in Scotland in case that makes any difference to legalities etc.

AIBU to this that they were unreasonable in this situation? They’ve really taken the shine off of moving day for me since it all got quite tense and stressy. We are also in the new house over 2 hours later than we could have been.

This happened to us. We arrived at our new house to find the current owner still moving her stuff out. This was about 25 years ago and we didnt collect keys or hand in keys then, not sure why. Anyway she had a small van and once it was full she locked the door, refused us entry as the house was only half empty and disappeared to her new house, returning several hours later. We spent about 4 hours sat on the doorstep. In the end we were moving our stuff in the front door while she was moving the rest of her stuff out the back door in the dark. Crazy.

Legally the house is no longer theirs, they sold it , funds were transferred , if they had no where to go thats between them and the seller of the house they are buying , not the op.

Amazed your solicitor didnt advise , if they didnt give vacant possession then they are liable for additional costs.

If they had damaged anything in those couple of hours the op would be liable and what if their buy had fallen through , how long should they leave them then?

We found a bloody live corn snake in the middle of the filthy living room when we brought this house.
The whole house was so filthy we slept in a tent in the back garden for 3 nights because I couldn’t stand the smell and dirt. When we’d seen the house on our two visits it had been immaculate and I can only imagine that they did absolutely nothing housework-wise in the intervening four months <<shudder>>, including cleaning up after their cat.

Not in scotland you cannot , no such thing as squatters rights here.

My son turned up with the keys to his new house. The stereo was blaring and the tenant had made no effort to pack. The solicitor said to give him 24 hours and then come back.
When challenged he said that he hadn't received the money in to his hand yet.

Oh god I hate that ‘loaded and homeless’ stage of house buying. Where your old house no longer belongs to you, but your money hasn’t gone across yet.

Our solicitor was shit and ‘went to lunch!’ Last time and we were as we called it ‘loaded and homeless’ for 3 hours (normally it doesn’t take that long!). Seriously pissed off, but not our buyers fault. We sat in the estate agents (my friend worked there) and had a coffee and some cake and ended up having to pay removal guys extra ad they were on the drive waiting for the go ahead to go in. YNBU.

Idk I’d have let them stay a couple hours I guess.

But I definitely regret saying anything now I’ve received about 50 scathing notifications 😬

No. There is a clause that your buying is dependent of a sale. On the whole chain. Either it goes through or not.

Yes of course,
you need to be “ready to go” but the people didn’t vacate yet as not heard from…it isn’t they weren’t ready. Or did I miss that part?

Yeah they do need to be ready to go

No you are wrong!

https://myhomemoveconveyancing.co.uk/buyers/exchange-and-completion/completion-day-explained/

the bit about legally owning the next property is the key!

you need to be “ready to go” but the people didn’t vacate yet as not heard from…it isn’t they weren’t ready.

You need to go, vacate, leave as soon as the sale has been completed because it's no longer your house. They knew the sale had been completed. They were waiting to hear if the purchase of the house they were buying had been completed, but you can't do that while sitting in a house you no longer own!

There will always be a slight time lag because the funds have to move from your purchaser to you (which is the point when your sale is completed and you leave your old house) then on to your seller (which is the point when your purchase is completed and you can access your new house).

Nope, definitely not. Each and every sale in the "chain" is a separate transaction, with no legal dependency on any other.

If you've been involved in a chain with that type of clause either a) you've mis read or mis understood what it was saying, b) you're in another country or c) you were right royally screwed over by all the solicitors in the chain.

There are 2 transactions taking place for anyone not at the bottom or the top of a chain, your sale of the old house and your purchase of the new one.

In OPs case the transaction had completed on both the house they had sold, and the house they were purchasing. From their vendor's point of view the transaction had completed for them selling their house to the OP, but they were waiting on notification that their purchase had gone through. So they HAD heard about them no longer owning their old house, just hadn't yet heard about the new one.

I'm assuming you have no legal training

That's an English website. The OP is in Scotland. I do note, however, that the linked website mentions a financial penalty.

Someone who helped them move probably "helpfully" removed the blinds. They probably even told them not to, but people don't listen.

its irrelevant it’s the same process on completion day, im not sure why you’re mentioning financial penalty, you stated the “whole chain is reversed” I.e. the people at the bottom of the chain, that have completed legally, their mortgage and funds clear, who legally now own the home has to move back out because someone at the top of the chain failed t complete,

How do you stop the people at the bottom of the chain legally owning the house because they’ve completed? It’s done, they own the home and have moved in and it’s theirs. You can’t then give them a call and say “move back out” it’s legally yours but five houses up the chain it’s fallen apart. It’s too late by then.

I actually did not state "the whole chain is reversed". You seem to be mixing me up with someone else.

Ok, you were agreeing with that person. Whatever, once the I individual property has completed, the rest of the chain does what they like. If you’ve paid for, and legal ownership of the property is yours, then no financial compensation is coming from you, it’s coming from the person in the chain that has not met their legal obligation. How on earth would you get money from someone who had paid the money due for their property in the right time etc.

That is in both England and Scotland.

Yes, that's right. The financial compensation comes from the person who has failed to move out in time.

I know it’s right! I said it originally and I was responding to the poster saying the whole chain was reversed! 🤦‍♀️