 | Home > Off Topic > One for the property boffs |
 
|
|
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6318   
|
yes annoying as it's now over a year. |
||
5th Jun 2020 7:22am |
|
| ARC99 Member Since: 19 Feb 2013 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 1831  
|
This reminds me of the problems we had with the Solicitor when we bought our current house new. The cost of the house included our portion of the costs of the road surface and foot paths, the building society decided to instruct the solicitor to with withhold the money until the builders received confirmation from the Local Authority that the work had been completed, if I remember correctly in 1980 it was £500.00 .
After a year the road was surfaced and the footpaths laid six months after that I received a bill via the solicitor for £500.00 from the builders along with a bill from the solicitor for handling the bill of £200.00 , I rang them and reminded them that I had paid their bill some months previously which had included the handling of this bill . I was expecting them to say, oh we are sorry or something similar, no all I got was you owe a Total of £700.00 £500 for the road etc and £200.00 for us handling the bill and this is now over due which could result in court action. My reply was I will see you in court which I did and I produced there letters and final statement. I walked out with a cheque for £500.00 in compensation. They were unable to locate any paperwork they had sent me and did not know what had happened to the delayed £500.00 pounds. Don't make old people mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to  us off.
Richard |
||
|
5th Jun 2020 2:22pm |
|
| Slideywindows Member Since: 09 Sep 2016 Location: North Essex Posts: 1293
|
I've just paid my ex-wife's £30,000 divorce solicitor's bill (as well as my own!).
I will refrain from saying what I think of solicitors........  |
||
|
5th Jun 2020 10:12pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6318
|
/\ i have say that sound a tad unfair
 |
||
|
6th Jun 2020 10:49am |
|
| Grenadier Member Since: 23 Jul 2014 Location: The foot of Mont Blanc... Posts: 5878  
|
In France, if you take a small mortgage/loan, for example to do some renovations, you are required by law to have the bank’s dossier checked by a solicitor (notaire). This might make sense for a lay person, just to ensure all is ticketyboo, but my wife spent 25 years in banking and is frankly more qualified than the notaire, and perhaps even the 30-something bank manager, as she is old school enough that many of the loans she arranged were pre-computers. Further, many were when she was based in the City of London so far, far bigger than a loan for some new windows or a new roof. Nevertheless we have to bite the bullet and pay approx 2000€ for the unqualified notaire to give their sign off. Oh, and it takes three weeks so just delays the loan. And even when they have given their blessing, we’re obliged to wait for a further cooling off period, just to be sure. And finally, to rub salt in the wound, the French equivalent of PPI is also a legal requirement.
 Monsieur Le Grenadier
I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list..... 2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey |
||
|
8th Jun 2020 7:43am |
|
| Alex1976 Member Since: 23 Jan 2013 Location: Buckingham Posts: 596
|
There is nothing unusual in this situation and it is no ones ‘fault’.
The solicitor acting for the purchaser will have acted to protect their client by requesting a retention be made, in this case £500, so should the Service Charge accounts end with a deficit, then the current owners can draw on some or all of this retention sum to cover that deficit payment. Legally the new owners became responsible for all debts due on that property when they took ownership, and knowing there may be a deficit on the Service Charge still to become due, they made a retention. The Service Charge Accounts should be completed within six months of the year end, at that point there will either be a deficit declared or it will be within budget. The retention can then be released, minus any deduction for the deficit. The solicitor will be holding the funds in their client account and as such are not benefiting from it, so they have no interest in holding onto this longer than they need to. They would rather just get it done and close the file. The Managing Agent or Accountant who acts for them is where the issue sits and if they are not progressing the accounts quickly then it is worth a chase to them. If you need some specific advice, feel free to PM me. |
||
|
8th Jun 2020 9:12am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2025 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
