Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

No caveat emptor when selling a house

including wills and probate
stewamax
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
Has thanked: 83 times
Been thanked: 781 times

No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416386

Postby stewamax » May 31st, 2021, 4:11 pm

Moderator Message:
I've moved this to Legal Issues as it seems more suited there (chas49)


Something I came across in passing when renewing an insurance policy that may be well known – but not to me…
If, knowingly or otherwise, I have substandard work done on my house and then I sell it, caveat emptor does not apply, and it seems irrelevant whether or not I disclose the work to the buyer. This liability appears not to be time limited or limited even to my immediate sale (to the buyer who may in in due course turn sell the house on).
I was so surprised at this I went back to primary legislation: Defective Premises Act 1972 1972 Ch 35 section 3 “Duty of care with respect to work done on premises not abated by disposal of premises”

The duty of care may technically be due from my dodgy electrician or cowboy builder, but as their employer and house seller, I may be landed with carrying the can.

This is my reading; CK or other experts may well correct it!

AsleepInYorkshire
Lemon Half
Posts: 7383
Joined: February 7th, 2017, 9:36 pm
Has thanked: 10514 times
Been thanked: 4659 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416415

Postby AsleepInYorkshire » May 31st, 2021, 6:17 pm

stewamax wrote:Something I came across in passing when renewing an insurance policy that may be well known – but not to me…
If, knowingly or otherwise, I have substandard work done on my house and then I sell it, caveat emptor does not apply, and it seems irrelevant whether or not I disclose the work to the buyer. This liability appears not to be time limited or limited even to my immediate sale (to the buyer who may in in due course turn sell the house on).
I was so surprised at this I went back to primary legislation: Defective Premises Act 1972 1972 Ch 35 section 3 “Duty of care with respect to work done on premises not abated by disposal of premises”

The duty of care may technically be due from my dodgy electrician or cowboy builder, but as their employer and house seller, I may be landed with carrying the can.

This is my reading; CK or other experts may well correct it!

The Defective Premises Act 1972: Establishing and Escaping Liability

To properly understand the Act, it is important to know a bit about its history. It was created to plug an unsatisfactory hole in the law that largely excused non-resident landlords from liability for injuries caused by the dangerous condition of the premises they leased. The injured person had no claim against the landlord at common law or under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 (see Cavalier v Pope [1906] AC 428 and Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd [1966] AC 522). Wounded visitors were left with an unattractive claim against the tenant, who rarely had the money to compensate them. If tenants were hurt they had to rely on the law of contract

Is the Act time barred to 6 years?
https://www.lawworks.org.uk/sites/defau ... .03.16.pdf

AiY

stewamax
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
Has thanked: 83 times
Been thanked: 781 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416447

Postby stewamax » May 31st, 2021, 8:56 pm

Whether or not it only applies to rented or leased property hinges on the repeatedly-used phrase 'provision of dwelling' and what 'provision' means.
If I buy a house to live in, I am providing myself with a dwelling, so for me to be exempt from this Act 'provision' would need to be defined as provision to a third party for reward.

chas49
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1935
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:25 am
Has thanked: 216 times
Been thanked: 457 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416469

Postby chas49 » May 31st, 2021, 11:02 pm

As referenced in AiY's post above, the Limitation Act 1980 applies:

s9 Time limit for actions for sums recoverable by statute
(1)An action to recover any sum recoverable by virtue of any enactment shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.


So it is time limited.....

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7084
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3791 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416474

Postby Mike4 » May 31st, 2021, 11:38 pm

stewamax wrote:Whether or not it only applies to rented or leased property hinges on the repeatedly-used phrase 'provision of dwelling' and what 'provision' means.
If I buy a house to live in, I am providing myself with a dwelling, so for me to be exempt from this Act 'provision' would need to be defined as provision to a third party for reward.


Ah that's interesting.

I remember decades ago selling a house, and my solicitor telling me about this act and how it made me liable for doing my work on it correctly and to all the relevant standards. I was rather taken aback to learn this but now it seems he was wrong. I was not liable to the buyer for all my unwitting slapdash short cuts after all. That only counts in all my rentals.

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5243
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3242 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416697

Postby didds » June 1st, 2021, 10:00 pm

stewamax wrote:The duty of care may technically be due from my dodgy electrician or cowboy builder, but as their employer and house seller!


surely you are not their employer though?

you are their client in the same way that your car's mechanic is not your employee, your window cleaner not an employee, the milkman etc etc

didds

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10689
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1458 times
Been thanked: 2965 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416718

Postby UncleEbenezer » June 1st, 2021, 11:07 pm

didds wrote:
stewamax wrote:The duty of care may technically be due from my dodgy electrician or cowboy builder, but as their employer and house seller!


surely you are not their employer though?

you are their client in the same way that your car's mechanic is not your employee, your window cleaner not an employee, the milkman etc etc

didds

I would have thought the householder would be covered by due diligence. So getting Mike to mend the boiler you verify that he's gas safe registered, and so long as he is, you're doing the right thing. On the other hand, if Dodgy Eddie offers a cheaper quote but isn't qualified, then a subsequent explosion is going to need a good lawyer ...

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5243
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3242 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416745

Postby didds » June 2nd, 2021, 8:38 am

UncleEbenezer wrote:I would have thought the householder would be covered by due diligence. So getting Mike to mend the boiler you verify that he's gas safe registered, and so long as he is, you're doing the right thing. On the other hand, if Dodgy Eddie offers a cheaper quote but isn't qualified, then a subsequent explosion is going to need a good lawyer ...



Yes. But you are still not Dodgy Eddie's employer, any more or less than if you had hired Mike.

chas49
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1935
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:25 am
Has thanked: 216 times
Been thanked: 457 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416754

Postby chas49 » June 2nd, 2021, 9:20 am

Moderator Message:
I've moved this to Legal Issues as it seems more suited there (chas49)

stewamax
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
Has thanked: 83 times
Been thanked: 781 times

Re: No caveat emptor when selling a house

#416804

Postby stewamax » June 2nd, 2021, 12:09 pm

UncleEbenezer wrote:I would have thought the householder would be covered by due diligence. So getting Mike to mend the boiler you verify that he's gas safe registered, and so long as he is, you're doing the right thing. On the other hand, if Dodgy Eddie offers a cheaper quote but isn't qualified, then a subsequent explosion is going to need a good lawyer ...

Exactly. And your point applies whether or not the Act applies only to rented property (i.e hinges on the definition of 'provision').
GasSafe is something of an exception as it is a legally-mandated scheme (the GSIUR) with checkable registration.
Control over electrical work (e.g. Building Regs Part P qualification) is a similar attempt but somewhat looser.
But for general building work how do I know if 'Safe and Sure Construction 2021 Ltd' ('...we have 50 years experience...') will actually install stainless steel A1 fire-rated cavity trays - or any cavity trays - over my new external doors without having an onsite architect or structural engineer to manage the project?


Return to “Legal Issues (Practical)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests