legal action? historical subsidence house sold without declaring

[imiami]

My friends bought a house and paid building level 3 survey, but survey didn't find any problem, the ad on rightmove didn't mention any histoircal subsidence, after a few months they moved in, they heard from neighbour the house had subsidence more than 25 years ago.
Then they searched the files from the vendor, they realized there is a structual engineer report 20 years ago, the 2nd page mentioned the subsidence, and the conclusion is the movement should not happend again. It seemed the house is ok, you might not id the repaired cracks around the house.
The vendor didn't declare to property agence when they were selling it, and vendor only mentioned the tree root removal, the tricky action is the vendor provided the structual engineer report, as the vendor want to gamble nobody read the 2nd page.
I trust this is a calculated covering for gain better value, which is total unfair.
If they take the vendor to court, how about winning rate?
I think the fairness, the vendor refund 10% the selling price. and the survey should pay some as well, the solicitor of buyer should find the problem as well.
Thanks

What financial loss have they suffered, or are realistically likely to suffer?

Has there been any subsidence since the 20 year old structural engineer's report was written? This was provided to the buyer who, rather stupidly, didn't read it or their solicitor didn't read it.

There has presumably been no recurrence of cracks, the likely cause of the subsidence has been removed and there's been no further movement. What exactly is the issue?

By property agency, do you mean the estate agents? If the structural engineer report was provided by the seller and wasn't read by the buyer or their conveyancer, I'd say it's tough on the buyer.

I think if the buyers have a claim for anything it should be against the surveyor.

(Thst is, if there are indeed any remaining structural issues.)

Is there any subsidence there now? If not, what have they lost?

Normally Caveat Emptor. They provided the report. The house was surveyed. If there is an issue it's on that surveyor, but in the small print of their contract will be lots of 'only visible' 'within reason' 'assumptions' that correct building methods were used.
You suggest the sellers purposely misled your friends. Are you sure they were the owners 20 years ago? Maybe they too bought without knowing the history.
What did the sellers put in the Property Information Firm (TA6)? There are questions there about underpinning and any remedial works. If they intentionally lied that could lead to something. There could be friends for a misrepresentation claim. But the fact remains the issue was resolved and apparently no movement has occurred in the intervening years. Not sure how successful they would be.

You are nuts if you think this will go anywhere. House sellers go by the 'sold as seen' moto. Surveyors get out of jail card free as pp said is that they always use words such as reasonable, seen, which unfortunately gets them off the hook for many things.

Unless they actively lied in any of the questions asked by the solicitor, there is nothing that can be done. Also can’t see there is any loss and in any event the buyer didn’t bother to read a report that they were given that declared it!

Your friends sound like scam artists. The sellers disclosed the survey!

Considering the vender provided the report I think you’d struggle to prove they were trying to hide it

this can't actually be a serious post, can it?

Sorry, but what exactly are they claiming for?
-Vendors disclosed information
-subsidence was over 25 years ago (ie historical)
-nothing was picked up on survey

Sounds like your friends are out to create problems where there are none.

No one is going to give them 10% of the purchase price back that's absolutely absurd.

If it was fixed what's the problem? The current survey is the only one that matters and that found no current problems. If you want to complain, complain to your surveyor if you think there is a problem they didn't find.

Edit: And surely you read every word of every document for something as important as a house purchase. I certainly do, why would you not read a second page?

The sellers disclosed the subsistence. It’s not their fault your friend’s couldn’t be bothered to read it. Subsidence was remediated 20 years ago and the level 3 survey found nothing. So your friends just want a pay out based on some gossip from a neighbour who has no idea of the full picture.

So there was mention but no read it or pointed it out? How is that the sellers fault?

I think your friends have more of a case against their solicitor and possibly the surveyor if they were provided with the documents (which presumably they should have read if they were given them - but they may well not have been given them.) Seriously - the whole reason that house buying takes so sodding long in this country is that people do read allllll the way to page 2 of documents!!

So their complaint is that the surveyors disclosed the historic subsidence on the wrong page of the structural report they provided?

The sellers should pay because the buyers chose to not read the report the sellers gave them, which clearly stated previous subsidence?

Yeah. Buyers should jog on.

So they were given the info but didn't bother to read it?

Good luck with that one 😂

Huh? So they had the report and didn’t bother reading it and now want to sue someone, you have to be kidding?

If the purchasers were provided informaton prior to completion the paperwork before completion, I think there is very little come back. Only come back would be if the sellers were asked if they had any knowledge of subsidence and if they did and lied.

What caused the subsidence by the way?

Then they searched the files from the vendor, they realized there is a structual engineer report 20 years ago, the 2nd page mentioned the subsidence, and the conclusion is the movement should not happend again. It seemed the house is ok, you might not id the repaired cracks around the house.

So, they were provided with the information, didn't read it and the report says the problem has been resolved...? Exactly what are they planning legal action for? They are money grabbers, pure and simple.

what financial loss have they suffered?

First, you'll need to prove negligence of the solicitor.

Second, you'll need to prove a loss.

I think the solicitor not picking up the historic subsidence is the only argument you have but you still can't prove any loss.