Solicitor negligent ?

Hello everyone.

My partner bought a leasehold property where the council is the landlord. Its a ground floor flat in a block of four flats in a semi detached building style lay out.

She only got the basic building survey and admitedly this wasnt the most thorough way to go about things.
She, discovered from a neighbour, not long after moving in that the building was suffering from subsidence and due to be demolished or underpinned at some stage.

A year or so later (this year) she was informed by the council that it was the other side of her block that was suffering from subsidence and not her property.

Seeing as her property was not subsiding she decided to put the property up for sale and a buyer was soon interested.
This buyer also did not take out any sort of building survey as they were a cash buyer.

The solicitor acting on behalf of the new buyers sent a list of questions to the council requesting information on things you would expect to be asked if you were acting on behalf of a client who was about to purchase a leasehold property where the council was the landlord. It included a question on whether there was any future expenditure expected on the property or the neighbouring properties over the next two years.
We sent the questions to the council and received the reply, to our horror ,that there would be £130,000 worth of work done to the whole of the property in the next two years covering work on underpinning, a new roof, new paths and correction work.

The sale is obviously now going to have to fall through.

Surveys were not carried out by my partner OR this new interested party so i am fully aware that this is a measure, always advised, that would have solved this whole issue. But i cannot help thinking that my partner has been a victim of her solicitors negligence in that when she bought the property all of this work was known of by the council AND the neighbours and without doubt the person who she bought the property from. The other three flats had already become vacant due to the councils knowlege of the work soon to be done.

The questions the current solicitor, acting on behalf of the current buyer, has asked are apparantly standard questions according to the council, who were expecting them. In asking them that solicitor has protected his client from purchasing a subsiding property in need of a great deal of work. But my partners solicitor at the time my partner bought the property, did not ask ANY questions of the council and as a result my partner has found herself buying a property in need of £130,000 worth of work that WAS known about by the council and the neighbours at the time !

Has her solicitor acted negligently ? We have been to the citizens advice bureau who jave suggested he has and that we may be best approaching the law society regarding the matter.

My partner is obviously shattered by the events of the past two years and it goes without saying that this story hammers home the necessity of a full survey on a property before buying. But, even still, i cant help feeling that she has been grossly under protected by her solicitor during the purchase of this property and that if her solicitor had only asked these, seemingly standard, questions she would have been saved all of this.

Are these questions standard ?
Should her solicitor have asked them ?
The current buyers solictors asked them so why didnt hers ?
Surely when buying a property where the council is the landlord these questions are standard ? The council is a third party in a sale like this and surely should be consulted regarding information and plans regarding the property ?
We checked with the council and my partners solicitors had asked nothing of the council.

Sorry about the long post. Any help appreciated.

1. If there is a negligence claim, it is important that your partner take immediate steps. Delay in issuing proceedings can allow you to fall foul of the statute of limitations.

2. You state that:

"The solicitor acting on behalf of the new buyers sent a list of questions to the council requesting information on things you would expect to be asked if you were acting on behalf of a client who was about to purchase a leasehold property where the council was the landlord."

and

"Surely when buying a property where the council is the landlord these questions are standard ?"


I am not sure that there is an "industry standard" set of questions for this specific situation. Purchase of a leasehold where the Council is the landlord would be relatively uncommon (I have never come across it in 15+ years). However, there is a standard set of questions which one would normally direct to the Management Company when buying an apartment in a block. It may be that the solicior sent a set of these questions to the Council, as the Council in this case are in a somewhat similar situation as a normal management company in a standard apartment purchase. While it is probably good practice to do this, I am not sure that failure to do so would constitute negligence, for the reason set out below.

The big difference between a management company and the Council, is that a Management Company would levy the individual apartment owners for the cost of repairs. That is why it is so important to find out if there is any major expenditure planned.

Although it is not clear from your post, it does not seem to be the case that the Council are planning to recoup the cost of these repairs from the individual apartment owners. This means that your partner is not going to be at a loss as regards the actual expenditure on the building. Sale has fallen through, and it is arguable that property may be devalued (even after repairs) but the losses are relatively minor compared to having to foot a quarter of the repair bill.

If I am correctly understanding the situation, it seems to me that by advising your partner (as presumably was done) to have the place surveyed, the solicitor adequately discharged his\her duty. Certainly not an A+, and not even honours, but quite possibly a pass mark.

I would not go complaining to the Law Society in this case: rather, I would contact them to get a referral to a solicitor who can advise on bringing a negligence claim. If your partner decides to complain she should not allow the claim to sit in abeyance while she goes through the complaints process.

I am not saying that she should bring a claim (on balance, I think she probably should not, but this is based on skimpy info), but simply that if she decides to bring a claim she should not delay in doing so.

I the seller not required to disclose any information about a property when they are selling? If so why is this different when buying a lease hold? In other words shouldn't the council have disclosed this information when the first purchase took place?

"Although it is not clear from your post, it does not seem to be the case that the Council are planning to recoup the cost of these repairs from the individual apartment owners. This means that your partner is not going to be at a loss as regards the actual expenditure on the building. Sale has fallen through, and it is arguable that property may be devalued (even after repairs) but the losses are relatively minor compared to having to foot a quarter of the repair bill. "

The council are indeed expecting my partner to pay one quarter of the £130,000 repair bill.

We actually visited the council department in charge and the manager in that department. She was very informed on my partners situation and, although helpful, stated that they were worried about how my partner would pay her quarter and wondered if my partners home insurance would cover it.

Are you sure that your partners original solicitor did not in fact ask the relevant question? Perhaps the question was asked and the reply was negative? Are you sure that the person from whom your partner purchased knew of the impending works? Can you obtain proof from for eg the council that the vendor was notified of the impending works?

"The council are indeed expecting my partner to pay one quarter of the £130,000 repair bill."

This alters things. My sympathy.

This does seem like something which would warrant a claim against the solicitor IF the solicitor didn't actually make the appropriate enquiries. I should clarify an aspect of my previous post: the "Management Company" queries could have been directed to the seller's solicitor rather than direct to the Council. This would be perfectly normal, in which case, as Vanilla points out, it could be that the solicitor did his\her job quite properly, but was given wrong answers.

One way or another, your partner should be consulting a solicitor immediately. There is very likely a claim to be made against somebody here. It might be the Council; it might be the builder of the block; it might be the vendor; it might be the vendor's solicitor; it might be your partner's solicitor. Delay might prejudice the case. Do not delay.

Thanks for the replies.

Vanilla -
"Are you sure that your partners original solicitor did not in fact ask the relevant question? Perhaps the question was asked and the reply was negative? Are you sure that the person from whom your partner purchased knew of the impending works? Can you obtain proof from for eg the council that the vendor was notified of the impending works?

My partner moved in to the property sep/2004 and in nov/2004 was told by her neighbour that the building was due to be demolished by the council due to subsidence. She phoned the council who confirmed this. The neighbour said that this situation had been going on for years.
We know the vendor knew about it but when my partner phoned the council they said they had no records of any letters being sent from the council to the vendor regarding this matter. It seems the communication between the two will have gone on via telephone and not correspondence. This is how the council have communicated with my partner also. No letters have been sent. So we are a bit worried as to how we can obtain proof that the vendor knew. We just know that she knew.

The council were planning to demolish the building at the time, the neighbours knew all about it, the vendor was selling up. There is no way the vendor did not know about the councils plans. But how do we prove it if the council say they do not have any letters ?

I think i read on the councils website that in the event work needs to be carried out on a council property the inhabitant will be informed one month in advance. So it is very likely that, seeing as the work hadnt been given a solid start date, that the vendor hadnt yet been informed by post.
But somewhere along the line the council had come and discovered subsidence on this block and had informed the people here somehow that there was subsidence and that the building would be demolished.
One flat was already vacant and a 2nd became vacant in dec/04 and wasnt reinhabited and a third was put on the market by the previous vendor. There is no way these people hadnt been communicated with with regards to this block needing extensive work.

But how can we prove it ?

As for the existence of any questions directed at the council from my partners solicitor at the time, my partner called the council, giving the name of her solicitor and asked if there were any records of him asking any questions at all to the council and they said that there were not.
True the questions would have been given to the solicitor of the vendor, then the vendor, to be given to the council and its a possibility the questions never reached the council. But how would we be able to prove this also ?

We have heard that solicitors do not like taking action against solicitors so we are worried that going to a conveyancing solicitor might not get us anywhere.
And the only help the Law Society have given me is to give me a list of local solicitors.

Surely my partner cannot be allowed to purchase a property in this manner that was clearly marked to be demolished. She had the assistance of a solicitor and the council had earmarked this property to be demolished for some time before my partner became involved.

There is a standard document called 'objections and requisitions on title' which are sent by every purchasers solicitor to the vendors solicitor. It is a 55/56 page document filled with pre printed questions in relation to various aspects of the title/ planning etc of the property in question. That document will either be with the title deeds or with your partners solicitor. You need to establish what replies were made in that document to your partners solicitor in the first instance. Secondly will the person dealing with the matter in the council confirm that they spoke to the original vendor? Because of the possibility of negligence here and a potential conflict of interest you should, as MOB has advised, immediately engage the services of a neutral solicitor to investigate these matters on your partners behalf. Time is of the essence here. There are many avenues to investigate here:

1. Was your partners solicitor negligent- i.e did they not ask the pertinent questions?
2. Has a fraud been committed by the original vendor- i.e did they answer the questions incorrectly or fraudulently?
3. Did the original vendor have notice of the impending works?
4. Will your partners house insurance cover the works?
5. Interestingly the council appears to have dealt with a very serious matter in a very light manner- surely the council should have sent notices to all persons affected by this- if not could they themselves be negligent in not doing so?

HTH.

"We have heard that solicitors do not like taking action against solicitors so we are worried that going to a conveyancing solicitor might not get us anywhere."

This is true - but is certainly not unique to the legal profession; If you wanted to sue an Irish doctor, you would probably have to get an expert witness from the UK. In Ireland, while you may have to speak with a few (or even a good few) solicitors, you certainly will find a solicitor prepared to take the case. Do not delay. Start today.

"And the only help the Law Society have given me is to give me a list of local solicitors"

The Law Society are not at fault here. They can investigate a complaint of poor service, and certainly will do if you ask. But they cannot bring negligence proceedings to claim compensation - your partner needs to do this herself, with the help of a solicitor. In just the same way, the Medical Council can investigate malpractice by a doctor, but if you need to claim against the doctor, you have to issue legal proceedings.

I sense a certain helplessness\frustration in your posts - the "surely this cannot be allowed happen" sentiments. It has happened, and must be dealt with. Luckily for your partner, we have a strong and effective legal system in Ireland, and she has a good chance of getting compensated for this mess. However, your partner must engage with this legal system without delay if she is to vindicate her rights.

Thankyou so much for your replies.

I will post here when i have anymore updates on the situation.