False Leasehold Information From Estate Agent - Should I Complain?

[kjonesy 10]

I have recently had an offer accepted on a leasehold property in Sheffield. As I'm aware of the potential difficulties of shorter leases, I checked with the estate agent and I was informed on two separate occasions and by two separate people that there were 899 years left on the lease. 

On this basis, I have proceeded with the purchase of the property, spending money on solicitors fees, mortgage fees and a homebuyers survey. 

 

After a query from my mortgage lender about the length and cost of the leasehold, I contacted the estate agent again to confirm, as well as asking my solicitor to look into this.

The estate agents again told me 899 years. However, my solicitor then informed me that there is in fact only 73 years left on the lease. I relayed this to the estate agent who after some investigating have agreed that they were given the wrong information by the seller.

 

I am very frustrated and annoyed by this, as I would not have even made an offer if I'd have known the length left on the lease, and I have now spent quite a lot of money on this property. 

Surely the estate agents have some responsibility of checking this information when they are advertising a house. They have told me it's not their fault or responsibility. 

Due to this, as well as numerous issues raised on my homebuyers survey, I am now very much considering withdrawing my offer.

Do I have a leg to stand on to complain to the estate agents? I can't help but feel they are responsible for this waste of my time and money.

 

Advice would be appreciated!

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2020 by kjonesy

[sedith 19]

Jeffrey Shaw one of the moderators on SF  is your man to answer your question

[spider1 11]

24 minutes ago, kjonesy said:

I have recently had an offer accepted on a leasehold property in Sheffield. As I'm aware of the potential difficulties of shorter leases, I checked with the estate agent and I was informed on two separate occasions and by two separate people that there were 899 years left on the lease. 

On this basis, I have proceeded with the purchase of the property, spending money on solicitors fees, mortgage fees and a homebuyers survey. 

 

After a query from my mortgage lender about the length and cost of the leasehold, I contacted the estate agent again to confirm, as well as asking my solicitor to look into this.

The estate agents again told me 899 years. However, my solicitor then informed me that there is in fact only 73 years left on the lease. I relayed this to the estate agent who after some investigating have agreed that they were given the wrong information by the seller.

 

I am very frustrated and annoyed by this, as I would not have even made an offer if I'd have known the length left on the lease, and I have now spent quite a lot of money on this property. 

Surely the estate agents have some responsibility of checking this information when they are advertising a house. They have told me it's not their fault or responsibility. 

Due to this, as well as numerous issues raised on my homebuyers survey, I am now very much considering withdrawing my offer.

Do I have a leg to stand on to complain to the estate agents? I can't help but feel they are responsible for this waste of my time and money.

 

Advice would be appreciated!

 

 

 

Shocking  but a lesson to be learned by every one guess the E   A  will not accept resposibility what does your solicitor say / Once had similar prob with a shared drive  they  just altered it in there brochure but i hadnt paid any money . Tricky one you got to ask your solicitor its going to devalue the property a lot . only thing i can see is get out time  

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

All EA brochures and Terms of Business contain small print excluding liability for just about everything.

But:

a. the disclaimer might be invalid if it falls  foul of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, esp. Schedule 2- see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents ;

b. this exemplifies why both vendor and purchaser should rely only on own solicitor's advice, not on anything said/done by EA;

c. you might nevertheless want to proceed if V has statutory rights to buy the freehold reversion [Leasehold Reform Act 1967] AND V serves Notice of Claim on the f/r owner AND the leasehold sale price is reduced by the cost of acquiring the f/r (or perhaps V can acquire it on the same date as V  completes sale to you).

Edited December 1, 2020 by Jeffrey Shaw

[bassett one 451]

i think from seeing homes under the hammer,theres a certain time,when  lenders wont lend on property if its a lease less than 25 or 50 years and you have to sell by auction? and although it increases the value it costs thousands to increase the length of the lease.

[geared 311]

It's under 80 years isn't it?

 

Either way the vender is a lying pig, there's no way they mistakenly told the estate agent it was 899 when it was actually 73.

[spider1 11]

17 minutes ago, geared said:

It's under 80 years isn't it?

 

Either way the vender is a lying pig, there's no way they mistakenly told the estate agent it was 899 when it was actually 73.

True      BUT a house with 73 years lease would be a modern lease as modern leases seem to be for 200 years on houses built 60 years ago  .   A house with 899 yrs lease  would be a older house some one should have picked it up or is  telling lies .     I live in a Dennis North home built 40 years ago got 120 years lease left 

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

Maybe there's scope for both to be true, in part. Perhaps:

a. there is a long (800 0r 999 year) lease; and

b. what V owns is a much shorter underlease created out of it.

Edited December 2, 2020 by Jeffrey Shaw

[spider1 11]

1 hour ago, Jeffrey Shaw said:

Maybe there's scope for both to be true, in part. Perhaps:

a. there is a long (800 0r 999 year) lease; and

b. what V owns is a much shorter underlease created out of it.

Dont think an ordinary layman will have heard of  B     Thats  why we use solicitors 

[topflat29 10]

The estate agent is under money laundering rules and should have a copy of the property title in hand before advertising for sale.  So  agent would know the years remaining on the lease.

 

 The estate  agent is required to   check  the property  title and the  name of title holder  matches   name of  person wanting to sell.

[spider1 11]

12 hours ago, topflat29 said:

The estate agent is under money laundering rules and should have a copy of the property title in hand before advertising for sale.  So  agent would know the years remaining on the lease.

 

 The estate  agent is required to   check  the property  title and the  name of title holder  matches   name of  person wanting to sell.

 

12 hours ago, topflat29 said:

The estate agent is under money laundering rules and should have a copy of the property title in hand before advertising for sale.  So  agent would know the years remaining on the lease.

 

 The estate  agent is required to   check  the property  title and the  name of title holder  matches   name of  person wanting to sell.

Not according to mr shaw  and the estate agent but its never right seems to me its all going to come back to let the buyer beware dont part with any money or put a deposit down until its checked out soon theyll all be at it found a loophole 

Edited December 3, 2020 by spider1

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

19 hours ago, topflat29 said:

The estate agent is under money laundering rules and should have a copy of the property title in hand before advertising for sale.  So  agent would know the years remaining on the lease.

 

 The estate  agent is required to   check  the property  title and the  name of title holder  matches   name of  person wanting to sell.

EA needs to understand about leases, underleases, reversions, etc. Few do.

 

This is why an intending vendor should consult own solicitor, so that clear title can be verified and produced to EA before marketing even begins. Again, few do!