Liability question
Discussion
Did a recent property transaction where the lender offered 'free legals'. Said legals were shambolic and delays cost me money which I can quantify. The solicitor is suggesting there was no contract between us whilst admitting numerous shortcomings.
I'm aware of the complaints route to conclusion but just wondered about the liability or contractual issue. I don't really understand how the free legals element can be used as a get out of jail card but interested in any experience or opinion on this.
I'm aware of the complaints route to conclusion but just wondered about the liability or contractual issue. I don't really understand how the free legals element can be used as a get out of jail card but interested in any experience or opinion on this.
mcflurry said:
It's probably not a simple one for PH to opine on. Such pieces in the jigsaw may include:
Did you have a contract in place with the solicitor directly, or via the bank?
Was there any fee paid to the solicitor?
Was the loss a direct result of the error, or was it consequential?
The contract would be with the bank. Did you have a contract in place with the solicitor directly, or via the bank?
Was there any fee paid to the solicitor?
Was the loss a direct result of the error, or was it consequential?
No fee paid by me to the solicitor.
If I understand the term correctly the loss is consequential. Delays resulted in a differential loss over interest.
The solicitor admits their errors - which would be very hard to deny anyway due to records - but is offering token compensation rather than the quantifiable amount I want. I don't actually want compensation - I just want to be in the position I would have been had they acted correctly and met their own service standards.
Just because there’s no contract with OP does not mean a person can do a poor job.
The letters from solicitor will say they are acting for the bank and not you, almost guaranteed.
First place I would look is at what the bank promised you as regards the free legals - any t+c’s? I’d really expect there to be lots of clauses to try and stop a claim from you vs the bank. But needs checking.
Also, what is the nature of the loss? Did the solicitors know that you would lose it etc. There *might* be a route in tort direct , but I doubt it.
How much is the loss? Roughly? If big, might be worth a letter of claim to get a settlement.
Austin.
ETA. Bits.
The letters from solicitor will say they are acting for the bank and not you, almost guaranteed.
First place I would look is at what the bank promised you as regards the free legals - any t+c’s? I’d really expect there to be lots of clauses to try and stop a claim from you vs the bank. But needs checking.
Also, what is the nature of the loss? Did the solicitors know that you would lose it etc. There *might* be a route in tort direct , but I doubt it.
How much is the loss? Roughly? If big, might be worth a letter of claim to get a settlement.
Austin.
ETA. Bits.
Edited by Austin_Metro on Friday 12th February 12:24
This wouldn't happen to involve a conveyancing firm called Enact, would it? They are utterly f
king shambolic. They act for Natwest with whom I remortgaged my hose in 2019. They took so long to do anything that my mortgage offer expired before completion. It was urgent that I remortgage to get the ex off the title (existing mortgagee wouldn't do it) so I basically spent on hour on the phone with some some bh and threatened them with all sorts. In short I said that if they didn't put it right in short order then I'd be expecting them to settle my outstanding mortgage in order to get the ex off the title. She accepted that they were in the wrong and got NatWest to reinstate the offer. My mortgager broker was astounded by that as he'd never heard of a mortgage offer being reinstated like that.
king shambolic. They act for Natwest with whom I remortgaged my hose in 2019. They took so long to do anything that my mortgage offer expired before completion. It was urgent that I remortgage to get the ex off the title (existing mortgagee wouldn't do it) so I basically spent on hour on the phone with some some bh and threatened them with all sorts. In short I said that if they didn't put it right in short order then I'd be expecting them to settle my outstanding mortgage in order to get the ex off the title. She accepted that they were in the wrong and got NatWest to reinstate the offer. My mortgager broker was astounded by that as he'd never heard of a mortgage offer being reinstated like that. charltjr said:
sociopath said:
Compensayshunnnnnnn!
No contract, so what agreement did they breach?
Some people.
Can I suggest reading the thread before commenting? I know it's a radical idea, but it might be helpful.No contract, so what agreement did they breach?
Some people.
" is offering token compensation rather than the quantifiable amount I want. I don't actually want compensation"
So does he want compensation or doesnt he?
This place is full of morons looking for a free ride these days. He took something for free and now wants to get legal.
I suggest he got what he paid for.
The solicitor admits their errors - which would be very hard to deny anyway due to records - but is offering token compensation rather than the quantifiable amount I want. I don't actually want compensation - I just want to be in the position I would have been had they acted correctly and met their own service standards.
Did you get tired halfway through reading that sentence and give up?
Did you get tired halfway through reading that sentence and give up?
Drawweight said:
The solicitor admits their errors - which would be very hard to deny anyway due to records - but is offering token compensation rather than the quantifiable amount I want. I don't actually want compensation - I just want to be in the position I would have been had they acted correctly and met their own service standards.
Did you get tired halfway through reading that sentence and give up?
So the OP does want to be compensated, just not for more than they've lost.Did you get tired halfway through reading that sentence and give up?
Still a form of compensation, no?
Austin_Metro said:
Just because there’s no contract with OP does not mean a person can do a poor job.
The letters from solicitor will say they are acting for the bank and not you, almost guaranteed.
First place I would look is at what the bank promised you as regards the free legals - any t+c’s? I’d really expect there to be lots of clauses to try and stop a claim from you vs the bank. But needs checking.
Also, what is the nature of the loss? Did the solicitors know that you would lose it etc. There *might* be a route in tort direct , but I doubt it.
How much is the loss? Roughly? If big, might be worth a letter of claim to get a settlement.
Austin.
ETA. Bits.
Thanks for this. I will dig out the terms and see what they say. The loss is the difference between interest rates. It is easy to calculate - the previous lender provided a daily interest rate and the new lender's rate was fixed. Allowing for some flexibility the claim would be between £4K and £5K so not enormous but too big to ignore. There are records of me pointing out the loss, promises to resolve the issues and admission of failings.The letters from solicitor will say they are acting for the bank and not you, almost guaranteed.
First place I would look is at what the bank promised you as regards the free legals - any t+c’s? I’d really expect there to be lots of clauses to try and stop a claim from you vs the bank. But needs checking.
Also, what is the nature of the loss? Did the solicitors know that you would lose it etc. There *might* be a route in tort direct , but I doubt it.
How much is the loss? Roughly? If big, might be worth a letter of claim to get a settlement.
Austin.
ETA. Bits.
Edited by Austin_Metro on Friday 12th February 12:24
sociopath said:
charltjr said:
sociopath said:
Compensayshunnnnnnn!
No contract, so what agreement did they breach?
Some people.
Can I suggest reading the thread before commenting? I know it's a radical idea, but it might be helpful.No contract, so what agreement did they breach?
Some people.
" is offering token compensation rather than the quantifiable amount I want. I don't actually want compensation"
So does he want compensation or doesnt he?
This place is full of morons looking for a free ride these days. He took something for free and now wants to get legal.
I suggest he got what he paid for.
Taylor James said:
Did a recent property transaction where the lender offered 'free legals'. Said legals were shambolic and delays cost me money which I can quantify. The solicitor is suggesting there was no contract between us whilst admitting numerous shortcomings.
In this case it sounds like the lender offered not to recharge you its legal costs. That's (obviously) not the same as a solicitor acting for you for free. Did the lender (the party you contracted with) offer any commitment / guarantee as to completion date of the financing? If not, it's not clear how they can be liable for your costs if they provided the financing later than you wanted.If the valuer had taken longer or if the lender's internal processes had taken longer would you be looking for damages?
NickCQ said:
Taylor James said:
Did a recent property transaction where the lender offered 'free legals'. Said legals were shambolic and delays cost me money which I can quantify. The solicitor is suggesting there was no contract between us whilst admitting numerous shortcomings.
In this case it sounds like the lender offered not to recharge you its legal costs. That's (obviously) not the same as a solicitor acting for you for free. Did the lender (the party you contracted with) offer any commitment / guarantee as to completion date of the financing? If not, it's not clear how they can be liable for your costs if they provided the financing later than you wanted.If the valuer had taken longer or if the lender's internal processes had taken longer would you be looking for damages?
No-one can guarantee a completion date but people can and do make other guarantees such as those I have alluded to. When those are breached there must be a consequence or they become meaningless. The complaints process will doubtless shed some light on this. Should there be a get out of jail free card then I'll have to find some other way to obtain satisfaction or simply put it down to experience.
I'll put my case to them again and if that's rejected then the ombudsman can rule and by then I should know if there's a legal route worth pursuing. As Austin implies there may be some middle ground. We all know even an ombudsman case costs (them) money.
AJL308 said:
This wouldn't happen to involve a conveyancing firm called Enact, would it?
No mate but it sounds similar. I get the impression they are driven down on costs and the accompanying dilution of quality gets passed on to the borrower. The model seems similar to 'approved repairers' with car insurance.I've certainly learned a lesson. I'll use my own solicitor next time. The online reviews for these firms tend to be shocking and I wish I had looked in advance. My made the flawed assumption that the mainstream lender would only use a well regarded firm. If anything is remotely different from standard they don't have a clue and as with many organisations if there is no process already on the system it's a nightmare to get a human involved let alone get someone to make a decision.
Taylor James said:
I don't think hypothetical situations are relevant or helpful. Likewise talk of 'damages' or the interpretation of compensation some seem to hold. The firm's repeated breaches of promises and service standards resulted in additional costs. That's all I'm interested in. I'm familiar with the process of complaining but what I am unclear about are the legal technicalities which may become more important at a later stage but may also be informative now.
No-one can guarantee a completion date but people can and do make other guarantees such as those I have alluded to. When those are breached there must be a consequence or they become meaningless. The complaints process will doubtless shed some light on this. Should there be a get out of jail free card then I'll have to find some other way to obtain satisfaction or simply put it down to experience.
I'll put my case to them again and if that's rejected then the ombudsman can rule and by then I should know if there's a legal route worth pursuing. As Austin implies there may be some middle ground. We all know even an ombudsman case costs (them) money.
Your claim, if you had one, would be for damages, or, in other words, compensation. So when you say that talk of damages and compensation is unhelpful you are mistaken. The legal function of damages is to place a person who has suffered a civil wrong in the same financial position that they would have been in if the wrong had not occurred.No-one can guarantee a completion date but people can and do make other guarantees such as those I have alluded to. When those are breached there must be a consequence or they become meaningless. The complaints process will doubtless shed some light on this. Should there be a get out of jail free card then I'll have to find some other way to obtain satisfaction or simply put it down to experience.
I'll put my case to them again and if that's rejected then the ombudsman can rule and by then I should know if there's a legal route worth pursuing. As Austin implies there may be some middle ground. We all know even an ombudsman case costs (them) money.
What are you seeking from this thread? Advice, or just affirmation? The problem with the former is that it might not be what you want to hear.
It is not clear from the limited details that you have provided that the solicitors were acting for you, as opposed to the lender, or that they otherwise owed you a duty of care. Absent a duty of care based either on contract or on some other relationship, you have no claim.
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 13th February 08:24
I don't know anything about the specifics of the specific situation here, but it would surprise me if failings in service would lead to recompense based on time delays unless they were specified up front and agreed to.
I would have thought the most you'd get would be reduction in fees, but much help.
As an aside my experienc of two high Street solicitors over the last few months doing a probate and a conveyancing were utterly shambolic too. The ones doing the probate gave me my fee back when I complained.
Bert
I would have thought the most you'd get would be reduction in fees, but much help.
As an aside my experienc of two high Street solicitors over the last few months doing a probate and a conveyancing were utterly shambolic too. The ones doing the probate gave me my fee back when I complained.
Bert
Sadly, the gulf in efficiency between the top end of the legal profession and the High Street end is wide. This is not to say that the top end is infallible, or that there are not good people at the High Street end, but it appears that the standards at many High Street firms doing boggo stuff such as basic probates and conveyances are quite a bit meh.
Breadvan72 said:
Sadly, the gulf in efficiency between the top end of the legal profession and the High Street end is wide. This is not to say that the top end is infallible, or that there are not good people at the High Street end, but it appears that the standards at many High Street firms doing boggo stuff such as basic probates and conveyances are quite a bit meh.
I know we’re moving away from the OP’s point, but I am not sure that this is all down to efficiency. I think it is closer ‘get what you pay for’. How much are you prepared to pay for a house conveyance? Seems to me that often it’s less than what a major service costs on a car - and I’m thinking Indy rates and not main dealer!
A lot of this type of work has been driven down to the lowest cost provider, it is not done by qualified solicitors either, it’s case handlers and 1 solicitor ‘supervising’ say 150 of them. They are ‘efficient’ in that they follow a process and use relatively inexpensive people.
Top end residential firms, and I’ve just looked at Cripps Pemberton Greenish’s website to get up to date, estimate between 1500 and 3500+ For the purchase of a 1m house. That pricing is the reserve of the successful powerfully built company director...
If you were paying 500 quid, how much qualified solicitor time an you reasonably expect?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff