Builders sue buyers to complete contracts

Can't comment on your solicitor of course but I would say in your shoes I would contact the examiner directly and find out how he/she proposes to deal with purchasers like you. Also, change your solicitor if you are unhappy. Go to see someone new, and explain why you are unhappy. If your solicitor did not do his/her job properly they obviously they should not be charging you more fees for work not done. Ask for a photocopy of your file, bring it to your new solicitor, and ask them to look it over. Find someone you trust and can have a good working relationship with. They will tell you if your previous solicitor did a decent job and communicated that poorly to you, or if the solicitor did a very bad job, in which case you could probably dispute the fees.
 
Your builders are not in liquidation and therefore are not technically insolvent.
Kate10 deals with the rest very well.
Why are you questioning your solicitor's entitlement to be paid?
Has he not done anything at all?
Why don't you get another solicitor?

I suspect your solicitor is not telling you what you want to hear. It is better to get the bad news from your own solicitor earlier rather than later before you invest a lot of time, effort and emotion in a complete non starter.

mf
 
That's difficult to understand - I looked at www.examinership.ie
It says that a company must be insolvent before the process of examinership is granted by the High Courts -

"The appointment of an examiner is an option available to insolvent companies in Ireland since 1990"

Ok these builders are not in liquidation - because they are afforded a period of 100 days protection from creditors? - however am I correct in thinking that if the examinership process is not successful then a liquiidator
 
That's difficult to understand - I looked at www.examinership.ie
It says that a company must be insolvent before the process of examinership is granted by the High Courts -

"The appointment of an examiner is an option available to insolvent companies in Ireland since 1990"

They are afforded a period of 100 days protection from creditors? - however am I correct in thinking that if the examinership process is not successful then a liquiidator will be appointed?

And then this company will be declared insolvent?
 
mf1 said:
Your builders are not in liquidation and therefore are not technically insolvent.
Kate10 deals with the rest very well.
Why are you questioning your solicitor's entitlement to be paid?
Has he not done anything at all?
Why don't you get another solicitor?

I suspect your solicitor is not telling you what you want to hear. It is better to get the bad news from your own solicitor earlier rather than later before you invest a lot of time, effort and emotion in a complete non starter.

mf
Click to expand...

I am questioning him being entitled to extra fees as he hardly responds to correspondence and when he does , its not telling me anything i dont know alreadyand pitfalls were never pointed out initially.
 
Kate10 said:
Can't comment on your solicitor of course but I would say in your shoes I would contact the examiner directly and find out how he/she proposes to deal with purchasers like you. Also, change your solicitor if you are unhappy. Go to see someone new, and explain why you are unhappy. If your solicitor did not do his/her job properly they obviously they should not be charging you more fees for work not done. Ask for a photocopy of your file, bring it to your new solicitor, and ask them to look it over. Find someone you trust and can have a good working relationship with. They will tell you if your previous solicitor did a decent job and communicated that poorly to you, or if the solicitor did a very bad job, in which case you could probably dispute the fees.
Click to expand...

Thanks for all that, Now one more question , how do I contact the examiner or find out who it is???
 
I think when a company goes into examinership it must register this with the Companies Registration Office (if you go to www.cro.ie you will get contact details for this office). They should be able to tell you the name and address of the examiner. Alternatively your solicitor could call the developer's solicitor - they would definitely know who was appointed. Good luck.

Kate.
 
A simple Google search shows that its Paul McCann of Grant Thornton. The number will be in the book.

mf
 
foxylady said:
Builder has been granted examinership. It is an apt that was purchased 3 yrs ago to be comleted last year and is not built although they had started. My solicitor doesnt seem to know his a***e from his elbow and is looking to raise his fee for all his work???????????
Click to expand...
Foxylady I'd be very slow to change solicitor. This is a very frustrating experience for you. It's also unchargered waters for the solicitor and I know they are supposed to be the experts. This is undoubadly creating more work for him, for which he has to be paid, he's probably just as frustrated as you. It is not his fault the builder has not completed. It would be better if you could work together against the builder.

But if you were given bad/incorrect advice by the solicitor initally which resulted in you signing the contract then yes I would change solicitor and would be suing the original solicitor, but that's a big if.
 
mf1 said:
All I can say to your last point is that the builders got a lot of breaks, the banks got a lot of freedom and we, as a nation, continued to vote in the party that was allowing/facilitating it all.

That is the nature of a democracy. I remember when FF got in the last time - it should not have happened but it did because people, on the whole, are greedy and selfish and love credit and flashness and the feelgood factor over sense, sensibility, stability and long term policies for a better society.

mf
Click to expand...
I think you're right and worse still people will still vote the same. We vote for what we have so we voted for this mess.
 
In relation to costs due under the building agreement it states that the builder gets "payment only for work actually done by him or materials bought to and left on the Site in pursuance of this Agreement" I would argue that the only costs due to the builder under this clause are actual construction costs and not the cost of the site also.

There is a provision that the employer can deduct any further costs they may have to spend to finish the property from any amount payable to the builder but it does not say that they are obliged to finish the property.

For combined agreement/contracts I think that in the case of receivership/liquidation the employer can determine the contract thus bringing it to an end. I would think that they are then not obliged to purchase the property but must only pay the builder for the work actually done less the cost of finishing the work.
 
You need to decide first what outcome you want. If presumably you wish to rescind the contract and get your deposit back in the best case scenario. I would write to the examiner on the same grounds as you wrote to the builder seeking the deposit back asking them to return it.

The examiner is supposed to see if the company can continue as a going concern and it may be that they will take the view it cannot if the purchasers are all unwilling to complete and court proceedings were necessary.

If the company goes into liquidation then you are entitled to determine the building agreement as per Clause 5. Regarding the builder getting paid for work carried out, then only thing that strikes me is that they will retain the site and building and can resell it.

In a situation where the employer owned the site you could see how the builder would be entitled to be paid for work actually done and materials etc but where the builder still owns the site he retains benefit of work done and arguably he could end up getting paid twice if he/liquidator sold the property later on. If I was dealing with a liquidator down the line that mentioned payment for work done I would try this argument.
 
FKH said:
You need to decide first what outcome you want. If presumably you wish to rescind the contract and get your deposit back in the best case scenario. I would write to the examiner on the same grounds as you wrote to the builder seeking the deposit back asking them to return it.

The examiner is supposed to see if the company can continue as a going concern and it may be that they will take the view it cannot if the purchasers are all unwilling to complete and court proceedings were necessary.

If the company goes into liquidation then you are entitled to determine the building agreement as per Clause 5. Regarding the builder getting paid for work carried out, then only thing that strikes me is that they will retain the site and building and can resell it.

In a situation where the employer owned the site you could see how the builder would be entitled to be paid for work actually done and materials etc but where the builder still owns the site he retains benefit of work done and arguably he could end up getting paid twice if he/liquidator sold the property later on. If I was dealing with a liquidator down the line that mentioned payment for work done I would try this argument.
Click to expand...

Would I be better off to write to them myself or do I have to get my "marvellous" solicitor to do it?
 
I would probably have your solicitor write to the examiner as it will have more weight than writing personally. You should probably make a written list of what you want your solicitor to say and set up a short meeting where you ask them to write a letter to the examiner stating again that the development wasn't finished on time as per the building agreement, that you are treating the contract as repudiated and requesting the deposit back as soon as possible.
 
What happens when the examinership period of protection expires?
Does the independent examiner get in contact with all buyers and inform what is about to happen - or do we get a refund of a proportion of our deposit?

Secondly is a rescue package is put in place - and a development is re- continued after a lenght delay will a buyer be entitled for a refund or compensation for a delay?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top