Turning ones back on suspect electrics?

[SimonH2]

There are also standard conditions with solicitors will use for house sales so eg ifyou take away the wall lights you aren't allowed to leave bare wires poking out of the wall.

Also, when someone filled in the sellers questionaire, what did they put against the questions on whether there had been any electrical work done ? If these were not truthfully answered then the buyer could have some comeback against the sellers.

 

[EFLImpudence]

If these were not truthfully answered then the buyer could have some comeback against the sellers.

...but not Eric - nor his wife, even though part owner, if she had nothing to do with the sale.

 

[SimonH2]

If someone was a part owner, then their signature will be on the paperwork. Doesn't matter if they did not contribute to what they were signing, their signature is on it.
And a quick check ... yes, the TA6 form says that each seller should sign the form.
And to think that SWMBO things it's odd that I read stuff before I sign it

 

[EFLImpudence]

Perhaps I should have said part beneficiary rather than part owner.

Does it then fall to the executor of the estate? Can that person be held responsible for the condition of the property?


It may be wise not to disclose any more details but treat it as hypothetical.

 

[JohnW2]

Perhaps I should have said part beneficiary rather than part owner. Does it then fall to the executor of the estate? Can that person be held responsible for the condition of the property?

Depending on the Will and the Executor(s), it can be done in different ways. The Executor may sell the property and then divide the net proceeds between beneficiaries. Alternatively, the Executor(s) may transfer ownership of the property (to the beneficiaries, jointly), in which case the new owners (the beneficiaries) would do the selling.

However, in both those cases, it would be normal for all the questions on the TA6 (like the one asking whether electrical work had been undertaken since 1/1/2005) to be answered "Not Known" - and, even if the Executor(s) or beneficiaries were family members of the deceased person, it would usually be next-to-impossible to prove that they "knew" about anything that happened during the previous ownership. The Executor(s) clearly cannot be "held responsible for the condition of the property" (which they may never have even seen), which they will sell 'as seen'.

I see quite a lot of this, since a substantial proportion of the properties I see being bought by my family member are "Executor sales".

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

Forms have been sent as PDF for signing, we have corrected any errors, and have the sent emails to show we have informed the solicitors of the corrections.

However the question is do we know of any electrical work done since 2005, I believe all the work was done before that date. But when the house was put into the children's names my father-in-law could have been asked all these questions so the answers would have been on record, however it seems the solicitors failed to ask the questions when he was alive, they only asked after his death, so we can only guess on the answers.

As far as we know he did no work on the house after he was 75 years old. By that point his wife was ill, so he did not have the time to do work, and by her death he did not have the inclination to do work. He had people in to do work, but I don't have the paperwork for this work so I assume all correct.

Personally I don't like what has gone on, however as with any group there has to be a chairman who controls things, and the others just say yes or no. And in theory it's nothing to do with me.

 

[JohnW2]

But when the house was put into the children's names my father-in-law could have been asked all these questions so the answers would have been on record ....

This seems to be a bit more complicated that appeared to be the case. Why was the house "put into the children's names" whilst he was still alive? Was this perhaps an attempt to avoid tax (if he survived a further 7 years, or whatever the magic period now is)? How long had the house been "in the children's names" when he died?

... however it seems the solicitors failed to ask the questions when he was alive, they only asked after his death, so we can only guess on the answers.

Yes, but when completing a legal form, one should/must not guess. In that situation, the correct answe ris "Not Known" or "Unknown", but ...

As far as we know he did no work on the house after he was 75 years old....

Ah. In that situation, a commonly seen reply is "Not to my/our knowledge" (with a 'multiple choice' TA6, one often sees "No" ticked, but with "Not to my/our knowledge" as a comment).

Kind Regards, John

 

[SimonH2]

Why was the house "put into the children's names" whilst he was still alive? Was this perhaps an attempt to avoid tax (if he survived a further 7 years, or whatever the magic period now is)?

The term there is "Potentially Exempt Transfer", and yes, it's still 7 years. But, HMRC are wise to that, and there's a whole class of taxation to catch such things - basically if he didn't then pay a fair market rent then his estate would be deemed to still include the property.

In that situation, a commonly seen reply is "Not to my/our knowledge" (with a 'multiple choice' TA6, one often sees "No" ticked, but with "Not to my/our knowledge" as a comment).

Some questions have "not known" as an option to tick. Otherwise, as said, I've just written "not known" next to it.
As an aside, for the electrical questions, I put an asterisk next to two of them and in the space below noted "* No such document"