tanx for that mf, thats what I was thinking of doin. probably have to get on to the family friend to find out his story. When I tried to make an appointment to see the original slor., I was told she wouldn't see me and any future correspondence will have to be done through my solicitor! what action can the law society take? Im not goin to let this go, My family and I had made numerous efforts to get the deeds of the property, only to be lied to my face time and time again by this joke.
This won't be a popular statement but this does not appear to me to be a life or death situation. Your son ( not you) has incurred minor fees and some inconvenience but largely has suffered no lasting damage.
I cannot believe you would write this. You do not think that a solicitor who has lied on numerous occasions, had not done the work in 10 years, then did the work but incompetently, taken the fee at the beginning but anyway sent bills not owing (after 10 years) is just basically a slight inconvenience? Do you think extra fees of 3K are nothing? Furthermore it could have resulted in a lost sale. Are you not outraged that a member of your profession acts in this manner.What damage ( apart from the extra fees ) has the son suffered?
How much compensation should he get? Will that make him feel better?
I see no evidence of 10 years of hassle.
mf
What damage ( apart from the extra fees ) has the son suffered?
How much compensation should he get? Will that make him feel better?
I see no evidence of 10 years of hassle.
mf
To be fair to MF1, previous post makes it quite clear what remedies are open to OP's son.
I find this whole saga a little odd.
Firstly, why on earth would a purchaser expect the vendor to pay the purchaser's fees? And get vendor's solicitor to do the work?
Secondly, - though it is certainly possible that the solicitor did not go through it in proper detail with OP's son- how on earth did neither vendor nor purchaser notice that the contract and transfer as originally prepared did not include all that was intended to be transferred? Who prepared the transfer map? Did neither vendor nor purchaser look at it?
Thirdly why on earth would a transfer (by way of rectification) of a field incur €3000 in legal fees ( which is circa €2500 plus VAT). I regularly do (voluntary) transfers of sites for 500\600 + VAT, and I am not a cheap solicitor. How much more did the daughter have to pay on top of this €3,000?
As is, I suppose, inevitable we are only getting one side of the story, and I rather suspect that the whole story - if we had it - is rather more mundane than it appears.
To be fair to MF1, previous post makes it quite clear what remedies are open to OP's son.
I find this whole saga a little odd.
Firstly, why on earth would a purchaser expect the vendor to pay the purchaser's fees? And get vendor's solicitor to do the work?
Secondly, - though it is certainly possible that the solicitor did not go through it in proper detail with OP's son- how on earth did neither vendor nor purchaser notice that the contract and transfer as originally prepared did not include all that was intended to be transferred? Who prepared the transfer map? Did neither vendor nor purchaser look at it?
Thirdly why on earth would a transfer (by way of rectification) of a field incur €3000 in legal fees ( which is circa €2500 plus VAT). I regularly do (voluntary) transfers of sites for 500\600 + VAT, and I am not a cheap solicitor. How much more did the daughter have to pay on top of this €3,000?
As is, I suppose, inevitable we are only getting one side of the story, and I rather suspect that the whole story - if we had it - is rather more mundane than it appears.
I cannot believe you would write this. You do not think that a solicitor who has lied on numerous occasions, had not done the work in 10 years, then did the work but incompetently, taken the fee at the beginning but anyway sent bills not owing (after 10 years) is just basically a slight inconvenience? Do you think extra fees of 3K are nothing? Furthermore it could have resulted in a lost sale. Are you not outraged that a member of your profession acts in this manner.
Firstly, why on earth would a purchaser expect the vendor to pay the purchaser's fees? And get vendor's solicitor to do the work?
Secondly, - though it is certainly possible that the solicitor did not go through it in proper detail with OP's son- how on earth did neither vendor nor purchaser notice that the contract and transfer as originally prepared did not include all that was intended to be transferred? Who prepared the transfer map? Did neither vendor nor purchaser look at it?
My daughters solicitor said the whole thing was left in a complete mess. The bill was for the transfer of house and land from family friend to my son and from my son to my daughter, so the €3000 will be minus costs between my son and daughter.
HI MF1 you posted while I was doing my other post. My point is not about compensation, a client whether a paying client or not (I don't see your point about this) has a right to proper service, 10 years is really quite extraordinary. Do you not agree? And I believe solicitors should be outraged at what some of their colleagues get up to. Not for one minute do I believe that you don't get title documents in that are a complete mess due to the incompetence of previous solicitors transactions. But as you are all 'colleagues' you have the tendancy to not highlight this, it's a very nice club that leads to the likes of ML, Byrne et al. Until your profession starts to whistle blow on each other and that includes here on AAM things will not change. Same applies to bankers etc. There is a long way between life or death situation and slight inconvenience. It's also not fair that I'm the only one to point this out and I always seem to be having these battles. Would you believe that when I saw your first post I was quite happy because I thought there was a sea change in that you referred immediately to the route of going down the Law society complaints procedure so I thought that's fine so it wasn't until I saw your second post that I decided to reply to the OP. I suppose the mods are going to delete this but I'd like to see a change for the better in Irish society so that the carry on of this behaviour by professionals is a thing of the past.If you check my earlier posts you will see the advice given. I did not use the expression "slight inconvenience" - I said it was not a life or death situation.
Could have / might have's are not things you can claim compensation for.
I try to avoid being outraged, about anything, on internet websites. I think its a pointless exercise.
mf
Hi Bronte,
You are making a valid point, but I was addressing a slightly different issue.
I would not expect a client to read and understand all the conditions of a contract. That is my job. They want to know that it is basically alright and that I am protecting their interests, and in this regard they don't want to 'sweat the details'.
However, I don't know exactly what the client has agreed to buy. The client does. So it is absolutely the case that I would, for example, show a client the map on the contract or transfer deed and ask them "is this what you are buying?"
If there was any doubt, I would suggest getting an architect\engineer\surveyor to take a look.
It seems very odd indeed ( not impossible, but very, very odd) that a transfer could have been signed without either the vendor or purchaser knowing precisely what plot of ground was actually changing hands or without being shown and having a chance to query or correct it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?