small claims court question

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

SilverSaloon

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 16, 2004
Messages
7,758
Car
1994 W124 E300D Estate, 1985 R107 280SL
Hi

I sold my house in april 2012. There was no planning permission for old 80's patio doors the previous owner got fitted.

therefore we had to apply for retrospective planning permission. This going via the usual planning red tape took a little while so they retained £1000 of our money on completion of the purchase that would be refunded or used to fund any expenses they incurr from the planning.

This was all done and dusted pretty much a month or so after completion with no extra costs being incurred (we paid for the planning/drawings etc beforehand). so in theory, the whole £1000 is still to be refunded.

so council tried to visit house to inspect and basically sign it all off. the new owners (buyers) of the house were not in/didnt answer door.

he tried again and was apparently sent away. They then basically gave up telling us that if they want them to finish it all to contact them and arrange the re-visit.

my solicitor has written many many times throughout the last year asking whats going on etc.

now, over a year on, the council have not been contacted to make the revisit.

the buyers seem to be ignoring letters, their solicitors writing to them reminding them of their obligations but no reply.

so, I want my £1000 back. They have had way long enough to sort it out and i'm fed up as they are taking the michael.

So, never having to do anything with courts before, my question is do I lodge it against the buyers of the house, or their solictors (who are holding the £1000)?

I'm guessing the clients?

thanks for any advice.

Derek
 
Last edited:
Give them notice of your intention to sue copied to their solicitors and then sue the purchaser, not the solicitor on the grounds that their retention is void by failure to perform.
 
If the council have the money you sue the council, surely?

The fact they have failed to complete their own paperwork despite having a year to do so is hardly your fault, as you are no longer resident you can hardly arrange access for them?
 
After 30 years - do you still need planning permission?

Nope.
If the council haven't noticed within a few years (I can't remember offhand how many, but is is less than 5 years) then an application is not necessary.

Doesn't help SilverSaloon though, he is £1000 out of pocket.

Solicitors letters will be adding to the loss.

Before you take the court route, are you sure they can/will pay if you get a judgement?
 
Normally in the case of retained funds there is a time limit stated within which settlement should occur. If your solicitor has not qualified the agreement with a reasonable time limit and simply agreed to "payment on the granting of planning consent " then that's extremely bad practice. Even then it could be argued that the planning process which might encrue costs has been completed despite permission as such not having been granted and the funds released. I think someone is being economic with truth here and its not the OP.
 
And, by the way and incidentally, what was the original solicitor, who handled your purchase of the house you've just sold, doing when he allowed you to buy a property which didn't have full valid permissions. I would suggest rattling their cage (if not the same one you sold with, in which case already happening I imagine).
 
Ask your solicitor, it's what you have him/her for.
 
The sum at stake is a grand. It would be covered under the small claims track which allows minimal cost recovery of solicitors fees. By the time a brief had handled it, you would be unlikely to see much of the original sum.

You have done everything you reasonably could - they have been unreasonable in failing to facilitate the process.

It is (certainly south of the border) a very simple process.
 
according to my solicitor a small claims will be unsuccessful.

yes its in scotland

also according to original solicitors used to buy the house everything was in place at that time. issue is that council wont/cant give us the info and the original solictors apparently dont have the paperwork anymore as it is past 7 years or something.

I'm annoyed by it all as it was hard to sell the house anyway so had to abide by buyers terms in order to sell it but out of pocket by £1600ish so far for all this for no fault of my own. personally i think the original solictors are at fault here as i think they missed the documentation. they were rubbish at the time, almost lost the house i bought as the sol went on holiday and told no one.

:/
 
Normally in the case of retained funds there is a time limit stated within which settlement should occur. If your solicitor has not qualified the agreement with a reasonable time limit and simply agreed to "payment on the granting of planning consent " then that's extremely bad practice. Even then it could be argued that the planning process which might encrue costs has been completed despite permission as such not having been granted and the funds released. I think someone is being economic with truth here and its not the OP.

This.

I would not expect a retention to be held for an indefinite period, and I would expect the other side in this sort of situation to have agreed to reasonable performance.

I think you need to see the exact wording. If it's just a case of 'holding the £1,000' until planning is agreed that's not great.

It's worth asking the purchasers solicitor if they are holding on to the retention still.
 
the purchasers solicitors do still have the funds. Last communication with them was that they intend to write to their clients and remind them of their obligations to finalise this.
 
the purchasers solicitors do still have the funds. Last communication with them was that they intend to write to their clients and remind them of their obligations to finalise this.

That's something then. Ask your solicitor what time limits or controls he placed on the retention...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom