# Continuous calls from solicitor for cert of completion



## roadrunner13 (15 Aug 2013)

Hi,

7 years ago my brother and his wife built their own house. They retained a solicitor and an engineer in order to draw down a mortgage. They paid both for the services and have been living in the house and paying the mortgage ever since.

Lately the solicitor has told my brother that the law society and the bank are on his case to furnish a cert of compliance, and it now transpires that the engineer wants €2k to issue this  cert. My brother is adamant that he paid all that was due and can't understand why this would be an issue 7years down the road. Plus both he and his wife were made redundant are just don't have €2k.

Surely the professionals my brother hired at the time should have done their due diligence and the bank should not have released the mortgage unless all the paperwork was in order. The solicitor is known as a bit of a bully and has been harassing my brother and wife with multiple phone calls daily.

Any ideas who is accountable here? 

Thanks in advance and apologies for the length of the post.


----------



## mf1 (15 Aug 2013)

"Any ideas who is accountable here? "

 It was ( and still is) part of your brothers obligations under the terms of getting his mortgage that he would, at the end of the build, furnish an Engineers Certificate of Compliance with Planning Permission and  Building Regulations. 

It would be usual for the bank to require interim Certificates for periodic drawdowns. The solicitor should have covered his own back by making sure that the final drawdown did not occur until the final  Engineers Certificates of Compliance with Planning Permission and  Building Regulations were issued. 

All too often what happens is that the client is so desperate to get the money for the last push that they will promise the sun, moon, earth and stars to anyone if they can have the money quickly . And after that, eaten bread is soon forgotten!

But if your brother won't do it, then it may well be that the solicitor has to foot the cost to at least get the Bank off his back but he will be entitled to sue your brother for the money. And that is not bullying - its being pragmatic. 

mf


----------



## roadrunner13 (15 Aug 2013)

Thanks for the reply mf,

You are making assumptions that the client (my brother) promised the sun etc to get the final drawdown. In actual fact they were in the position to hand back €20k of the morgage they didn't use, but anyway....
My brother hired professionals to guide him through the legal and planning process, and paid them in full on what he was told was completion, otherwise why would the bank issue him the mortgage? 
His solicitor implied that 7 years ago banks were not worried about this paperwork, but that now it was an issue. 
The engineer 7 years ago claimed he was fully paid but now wants a further €2k (despite the fact that he never visited the build after the raft went in). He did arrive unannounced recently, my brother's wife who was in the house alone with 2 small children thought he was a prowler.
I suspect that in 2006 rather than going out on a limb and not covering his back in order to do my brother a favour this solicitor cut corners because he was so busy, likewise the engineer and bank. 
And they now expect the person who hired them to do this negligent work to pay for their lack of due diligence. I may just be a little bit cynical however.
On what grounds could he sue my brother, if it was he who failed to make sure all was in order?
When  I mentioned bullying I was referring to the multiple daily phone calls that he seems to employ in order to harass.


----------



## dereko1969 (15 Aug 2013)

mf1 wasn't making assumptions about your brother, s/he was stating his/her experience in the area generally.


----------



## T McGibney (15 Aug 2013)

Providing a Certificate of Completion is an integral part of any self-build project process. Has your brother shopped around for the best engineer deal?


----------



## roadrunner13 (15 Aug 2013)

Thanks for the replies,

Maybe I'm confusing the issue with the length of my posts. 

My brother hired an engineer and paid him in full. He hired a solicitor to draw down a mortgage, make sure everything was in order and paid him in full. The bank provided him with a mortgage which he pays every month.

Now 7 years later the solicitor says everything is not in order and my brother is on the hook for €2k.

The solicitor should not have drawn down the money until all due diligence was complete (regardless of mf1's general experience in this area)
The engineer should have issued the cert he was paid to complete.
The bank should not have granted the remainder of the mortgage based on incomplete paperwork. (incidently my brother called the bank and they have no problem with his mortgage a/c).

I work as a painter/decorator if through my own fault I painted someone's house the wrong colour I would consider it a bit rich to expect the client to pay for my mistake. This sense of accountability doesn't seem to exist in the professional class!

Anyway it's all irrelevant as my brother and his wife are broke. Their main concern is to fill the oil tank for winter, they just worry when a well heeled solicitor harasses them daily to sort out a mess he could have prevented if he did his job 7 years ago.


----------



## Ravima (15 Aug 2013)

You asked initially for advice. You got a response from a highly regarded board member. The advice is not what you wanted.  You wanted someone to tell you that either solicitor or engineer was at fault. 

You say solicitor should not have drawn down the money. if he hadn't, there would be a complaint that he wouldn't let people into house. Perhaps, and it is a perhaps, solicitor drew down the money, on the understanding/promise/commitment of your brother to drop it in once house was completed. On the other hand, was engineer asked for it at the time? Perhaps yes, perhaps no.

It is required now and there is work in getting it. Engineer must review plans, compare with planning permissions granted and confirm that it is built in accordance therewith. 

There a difference to painting the house the wrong colour and the problem your brother has. 

Anyway, at the end of the day as you say its irrelevant. But it's not. Title to the house may be affected if the cert of compliance is not available. If the house is to be sold or transferred, it will cause problems.


----------



## huskerdu (15 Aug 2013)

The core issue here is that your brother does not have a cert of completion for his house. He says that he paid a Engineer to provide this at the time and now the Engineer is saying that he was not contracted or paid to do this. 

This is a rough situation to be faced with when he is under financial pressure, and I have sympathy. But that is the core issue, not the fact that the Solicitor has just discovered it and it very insistant that your brother help him solve it. 

Does he have paperwork for his contract with the Engineer saying what the Engineer was supposed to do. given the importance of the engineers role in a self-build, he must have had a written agreement ?


----------



## roadrunner13 (15 Aug 2013)

Ravima you are correct when you say that I want advice that confirms my argument, actually what I would really like is advice from someone who has been in a similar position and how it worked out for them. 
The painting analogy was not an attempt to compare like with like just an attempt to emphasise the lack of accountability in certain sectors of Irish society (this may have gone over your head, not to worry). I take your point though on title to the house and problems down he road, however thankfully this is not an issue at the moment. The rest of your post is just supposition, and therefore neither here nor there.

Huskerdu
You are right about the core issue (the lack of a cert). Unfortunately my brother has no paperwork at all, he expected the solicitor to seek and submit all documentation along the way, and paid him to do just that. The thing is though my brother doesn't need the cert... yet anyway and hopefully never will. The bank are demanding it from his solicitor.

i think mf1 clarified who is liable when he stated that the solicitor "should have covered his back by making sure that the final drawdown did not occur until the final engineers certs".etc

Thanks for the interaction folks, however someone must have had a similar problem to the one i have described and if so I would really like to hear how they got on.


----------



## emeralds (15 Aug 2013)

We built a house 6 years ago. The engineer gave us the final certification relating to compliance. Does your brother have nothing at all? Emails even?


----------



## Cantalia (15 Aug 2013)

You say the engineer gave you the final certificate relating to compliance, but are you sure you are not talking about the last certificate he gave you to draw down the last stage payment of the loan, getting a loan in stages was common in a self build. 
If so you are confusing two things. It was often the case that a completion certificate, which is a document forming a crucial part of you title deeds was included in the fee agreed with the engineer overseeing the build, but, it was also common that people just paid an engineer each time he visited site and did a completion notice to allow a further draw down of money. The should know themselves which the did.


----------



## huskerdu (15 Aug 2013)

roadrunner13 said:


> Huskerdu
> You are right about the core issue (the lack of a cert). Unfortunately my brother has no paperwork at all, he expected the solicitor to seek and submit all documentation along the way, and paid him to do just that. The thing is though my brother doesn't need the cert... yet anyway and hopefully never will. The bank are demanding it from his solicitor.


 
But, your brother built the house, or paid a contractor to built the house.
He paid an engineer and was under the impression that he paid the engineer to supply the cert of compliance.

Did he really think that the solicitor was project managing the project to down to that level of detail. 

Your brother does need the cert. His house is unsellable without it, and he promised the Mortgage company he would get one.


----------



## WizardDr (15 Aug 2013)

It turns out there may be many houses without certs of completion.

Its only relevant because some dude writing Mortgage Bond rules deemed a cert to be necessary as evidence that house was completed/

Some who never drew down the full amount on a self build are in that position.

It does not have to be your original engineer.

If its less than 6 years threaten to sue the engineer 

I think this has no implications for title and banks know this.


----------



## roadrunner13 (15 Aug 2013)

Hey WizardDr,

Thanks for the reply, I think you are right. The amount of dodgy/ incomplete conveyancing records that seem to be on record. Even nama have a nightmare on their hands trying to sort out title to property.
It's been 7 years though, i may just help out my brother and get an engineer to sort it for him. They are worried and are just not able to hold their own against this solicitor.
It just bugs me that these guys did not do what they were paid to do originally. I get the impression on here that people think my brother was foolish not to look after these issues himself and perhaps he was. He honestly thought by retaining an engineer and solicitor he would be free to build the house without having to worry about the paperwork side of things. 

Huskerdu,
Of course he didn't expect his solicitor to project manage, but a notification when there was a legal document outstanding is not much to expect.


----------



## dub_nerd (16 Aug 2013)

OP, although I don't know the answer to your question, I sense you not getting good advice on this thread. A lot of supposition is going on.

I did a self build 10 years ago. Never got any certificate of compliance. (I've only vaguely heard of such a thing). I never did anything about title ... I have title deeds to the land, that is all. I have no mortgage. I'm not thinking of selling any time soon, so if there's a problem I'll deal with it in my own good time.

So, who says your brother needs a certificate of compliance? Is it the bank who is belatedly trying to make sure the title to the property is good? Or is the solicitor doing this off his own bat, and if so why? However, the main question is -- what are the consequences (_for your brother, not anyone else_) of not doing it? If there are no immediate consequences, then he can just tell whoever it is to go stuff themselves (perhaps not in so many words). Just tell them he hasn't got the money and he's not doing it.

Just as an aside, I would find the concept of certified compliance quite hilarious in an ironic kind of way. I had restrictions on everything from wall and roof colours, to house type, orientation on "existing building line" (even though there was nobody within hundreds of yards of me), type of planting etc. etc. I complied with every detail. Now I have close neighbours on either side which the planners allowed to build utterly different house types, different colours, reoriented to face a sea view etc. etc. Both overlooking me in a semi-unpleasant way. I've half a mind to demand a certificate of compliance with their own policies from the planners. Complete joke.


----------



## dewdrop (16 Aug 2013)

In the past banks would not release funds unless they had, inter alia, a Certificate of Title from clients  solicitor which i assume that a certificate of compliance would be part of the certification. Does such a cert of compliance confirm planning conditions had been adhered to as i recall  when i enquired if planning authorities ever checked compliance i was told that the requirement of this compliance cert was in effect what ensured compliance. Apologies for poorly worded contribution.


----------



## mf1 (16 Aug 2013)

From WizardDr

"I think this has no implications for title and banks know this. "

This is wrong. A Certificate of Compliance is part of title and is required when mortgaging or selling. 

The difficulty with build projects is that the bank funds are drawn down in stages ergo there cannot be a Certificate of Compliance ( that the property was constructed in accordance  with planning permission and Building Regulations) until after the property is built which is after most of the mortgage is drawn down. 


Advice from dub nerd. 

"I did a self build 10 years ago. Never got any certificate of compliance. (I've only vaguely heard of such a thing). I never did anything about title ... I have title deeds to the land, that is all. I have no mortgage. I'm not thinking of selling any time soon, so if there's a problem I'll deal with it in my own good time."

Bully for you. You have not addressed any of your title issues. But then you don't have a mortgage so there is no imperative for you to deal with your title issues. 

"So, who says your brother needs a certificate of compliance?"

The. Bank. Who. Lent. Him. The. Money.  

mf


----------



## dub_nerd (16 Aug 2013)

mf1 said:


> "So, who says your brother needs a certificate of compliance?"
> 
> The. Bank. Who. Lent. Him. The. Money.
> 
> mf


 
It doesn't seem that they are the one doing the chasing. Why's that? And in any case my question is -- what are they going to do about it? Was it their mistake in not ensuring proper title in the beginning? Meanwhile the OP has pointed out his brother's not unreasonable expectation that everything necessary would have been put in order by the professionals employed at the time. A large bill seven years on seems outrageous. He'll have to pay it eventually if he wants to sell, but he doesn't have the money now and unless someone has leverage to compel him to pay it now, why should he?


----------



## roadrunner13 (16 Aug 2013)

Thanks Dub Nerd, you have it in a nutshell. My brother has an excellent relationship with the bank. They have not sought anything from him, nor is he looking to sell his house.


----------



## T McGibney (16 Aug 2013)

Hard to see the point in this thread when the OP poses a question on a subject where they clearly have already formed a fixed opinion.


----------



## dewdrop (16 Aug 2013)

If i employed professionals to look after this transaction i would expect that everything that should be done was done at the time and i would be flabbergasted to have the matter reopened after 7 years.


----------



## T McGibney (16 Aug 2013)

I think you may be missing the point that the certificate of completion is a separate assignment that doesn't form.part of the original build project. The benefit of this to the householder is that they can complete the final aspects of the job in their own time and when they can afford it. 

We waited 5 years before completing our kerbing and tarring outside (when we had saved up for it) and we never expected for a minute that the engineer's original fee would have included this additional work years later. Neither did anyone suggest to us that it should have.


----------



## dub_nerd (17 Aug 2013)

I think _you're_ missing the point that it's outrageous that nobody informed the client that there would be additional costs, billable later. It's perfectly reasonable for the client to expect to at least be _informed_ about this. Would you sign up for something where random bills would arrive at unspecified points in the future? That sort of information is what the client retained professionals for. (The comparison to a kerbing and tarring job does not seem apposite). In this case I would say it is the solicitor who should have informed him, since it was the solicitor who gave the undertaking to the bank that the certificate of compliance would be produced. From what I read elsewhere, in the past the mortgage could not be drawn down, and the client would have to rely on bridging finance, until the final paperwork was produced. This practice was changed to rely on undertakings from solicitors. I would imagine the banks are now panicking about being able to demonstrate the quality of their residential mortgage assets and are chasing old paperwork. 

In any case, it sounds like the client is going to have to bite the bullet and pay for this some time. That begs two questions -- is there any onus on him to produce it _now_ rather than later in his own good time? And if 2k sounds like a mad price to pay the original engineer to produce a piece of paper for a job _which the engineer himself oversaw_, can the client go elsewhere to get it done cheaper? I see online ads for certs of compliance from €250, although there will be qualifications in it for parts of the structure that can't be inspected. Again, can the bank do anything about this?


----------



## T McGibney (18 Aug 2013)

dub_nerd said:


> I think _you're_ missing the point that it's outrageous that nobody informed the client that there would be additional costs, billable later. It's perfectly reasonable for the client to expect to at least be _informed_ about this. Would you sign up for something where random bills would arrive at unspecified points in the future?



When you take on the responsibility of a house self build, its beyond obvious that if you don't look after your own interests, nobody else will, and there will invariably be unforeseen hurdles, costs and complications which can't be dumped in turn to third parties.


----------



## mf1 (18 Aug 2013)

" It's perfectly reasonable for the client to expect to at least be informed about this."

Ah but you see we are only hearing one side of the story! Imagine if we heard the other side!

mf


----------



## roadrunner13 (18 Aug 2013)

Mf1,

Your last post is a disgrace, you are inferring that I am not telling the truth. In your first post you suggested that altruistic solicitors were drawing down money on clients promises alone (laughable). You then in a subsequent post stated in an aggressive manner (The.Bank.That.Lent.Him.The.Money.) an inaccuracy, the bank have not asked my brother for anything. 
What would I possibly have to gain by telling a cock and bull story on an anonymous forum? I wanted somebody who has had a similar situation to definitely confirm for me that my brother has had bad service and was thus not liable to spend 2k. Anything else and I would be fooling myself.

This site would be useless if everyones posts were considered half truths!
Another poster said you were well regarded, not by me. The technical term for you is Troll. 

T Mc Gibney,
You lecture me on coming here with a fixed opinion, of course I have, if you can definitively prove my opinion wrong I will change my mind. You did the opposite by saying you were afforded all the time you needed to furnish the cert(you saved up for 5 years to complete outstanding work), my brother still has some unfinished wall to build around the site? 
What makes you different? Unless you didn't borrow the money(again, the bank have not requested anything from my brother), if that is the case then your post/experience is not relevant to my situation.


----------



## Luternau (18 Aug 2013)

I don't think anyone is saying you are not truthful-just that we are only hearing your side of the story. It is reasonable to believe that the other side (engineer/solicitor) would have their view of what transpired 7yrs ago. In the absence of this no one can be sure what is or was.
In the meantime, in a public forum, posters forming opinions or advising based on the facts presented or based on experiences is what AAM is all about. I notice you are a new poster, and many that responded are very regular contibutors that have helped with good advice to loads of people on matter such as this or totally different matters. Their advice here may be spot on or it may be wrong-but they are entitled to their opinion without you being critical of them. 

If you don't value the advice I am sure paid advice is available. This advice may not differ from what was said here and if so, would you reject it too?

If you say the bank are not looking for this-and the house is not for sale anytime soon, what has led to this becoming such a big matter for the solicitor? Is he facing some sort of audit or investigation into his practice by the law society or something like that and trying to get files in order?

I realise that you are looking for others to post with a similar experience-hopefully you will get some to do so. My thinking is that unless they used the same professionals, their experience may be totally different and of little help with this question.


----------



## roadrunner13 (18 Aug 2013)

With respect Luternau most threads started here begin with just one side of the story. I have no idea what the engineers or solicitors defence would be(but I would love to hear it after a 7 year delay) . 
It's hard to value advice when you ask  a question that i answered in the opening post, yes the solicitor is being investigated by the law society and the bank to tidy up incomplete files. In my last post  I also stated that I would change my mind if you could definitively show that I was wrong (but you did/chose not to read that either) so I would not reject paid advice or sound advice from poster on AAM if it contradicted my fixed opinion (having a fixed opinion is apparently frowned upon)

I may be a new poster but I am not new to AAM, I have used the site a lot down through the years. I just used to disregard the irrelevant/offensive posts stuck in the middle of threads. I didn't realise how personal it would become when it was my own thread and I reserve the right to be critical of posters who  misrepresent, misinterpret and cast doubts on my version of events. 
You try to sound reasonable in you post and perhaps you are, but to be honest you sound condescending and are subtly telling me to go away. Which is the best advice I have got so far.
Cheers


----------



## Luternau (18 Aug 2013)

Sorry for repeating some facts-this thread is nothing but confusing.

Yes, I am trying to be reasonable, and I definitely not being condesending or telling you to go away. How can you read that in to my post? Most people have tried to help you with advice. Sadly you reject most of it.

With respect, it is you that have been condesending to people here, including me now for no reason. No one called you untruthful. Wondering the other side of events is not unreasonable. By rubbishing other peoples thoughts and opinions you are really being disrectful to these people ( seeing as you put so much emphasis on ones right to an opinion).

Finally, I hope you get this cleared up.


----------



## coolhandluke (18 Aug 2013)

Having recently bought and renovated a house, there is a couple of issues here......

Firstly  a poster saying that not having the cert of compliance is not a big  deal, well we were not even getting a mortgage and my solicitor advised  not to go ahead with the purchase of the property because their cert of  compliance had gone missing.
The vendor had to go to the original  architect and get a the cert reissued, in order for the sale to go  through how much that cost, i have no idea.....

Move on, we purchased the house and built on, planning etc the whole works.......

How  can the bank be responsible for the cert, if you don't get it until the  work is completed ? We got our builder, the architect visited the site a  no. of times and said he was happy with he build and when the work was  finished, on the architects final payment he gave me his "opinions on  compliance" with the building regulations and some other cert.

To the OP, did your brother not ask for the certs at the time, i think going back now is a bit much ?

Another  poster said something about kerbing and tarmacadam the driveway, that  has absolutely nothing to do, with the basic structure of the property  and whether it complies with building and planning regulations.

On  and by the way, i was told the documents (original copies) given to me  by the architect, should be lodged with the deeds as they are extremely  important in the event we ever want to sell.......

I would also  say, the contract we had with the architect, expressly said that the  final part of his contract was to certify the build on receiving the  final payment....


----------



## T McGibney (19 Aug 2013)

Anyone who labels mf1, imho probably the most valuable contributor to AAM over the past decade, as a troll is undeserving of assistance here, at least in my book. 

Over and out.


----------



## Vanilla (19 Aug 2013)

roadrunner13 said:


> You are making assumptions that the client (my brother) promised the sun etc to get the final drawdown. In actual fact they were in the position to hand back €20k of the morgage they didn't use, but anyway....
> bank.


 
So they didn't draw down the entire mortgage? If the last stage payment was not drawn down it changes matters.


----------



## Vanilla (19 Aug 2013)

t mcgibney said:


> anyone who labels mf1, imho probably the most valuable contributor to aam over the past decade, as a troll is undeserving of assistance here, at least in my book.
> 
> Over and out.


 
I dunno about that, she has a very funny sense of humour sometimes.


----------



## WizardDr (20 Aug 2013)

@mf1 please give me the statutory reference to certificate of compliance.
I can find none. But would be relieved if you could. 
It may be on the conveyancing completion rules, which is a different matter.


----------



## mf1 (20 Aug 2013)

It's General Condition 36 ( the Planning condition) of the normal Law Society Contract. Only a fool would use their own makey uppy Contract.

mf


----------



## Time (20 Aug 2013)

Same with the auld BER cert I suppose too?


----------



## AlbacoreA (20 Aug 2013)

roadrunner13 said:


> ...My brother hired professionals to guide him through the legal and planning process, and paid them in full on what he was told was completion....



Is there no invoice or contact documenting what was being paid for. is the cert of compliance not part of that process?


----------

