House rewired, no certificates.

[ban-all-sheds]

Play hardball and they will stop quibbling.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

And it's not just pointless, it is theft.

 

[bernardgreen]

Tell him that hell will freeze over before you buy one, or before you drop the price by as much as 1p.

The buyers want your house. They want it. Exploit that.

It is high risk to assume the buyers wanting it will ensure that they will buy it. If there are other houses that suit them then they may decide to go for another house.

Only if the buyers need to buy your house can you hold out.

Indemnities do work if the worst happens. Pay a few pounds and have peace of mind that any costs that might arise will be covered by the indemnity. We recently sold my late mothers house. Buyers solicitor was a bit concerned about an over sight in the title deeds. £167 one off payment ensures that if anyone tries to take advantage of that over sight the legal costs will be paid for by the compnay that issued the indemnity. In 1980 a street of houses with garages at the bottom of their gardens were held to ranson. There was a 2 foot wide ransom strip between the public lane and all the gardens. When there were a lot of garages built the owner of the ransom strip arrived and asked for £1000 per garage, Thios who didn't pay lost vehicle access to their garage. A colleague who lived in the road and had a garage ( or his solicitor ) had spotted the discrepency between garden dimensions on the deeds and actual dimensions of the land and suspected a ransom strip. An indemnity was taken out and paid all the costs of him establishing a permanent right of access across the ransom strip. Others who could NOT afford the £1000 lost the use of their garage.

Edit NOT added.

 

[ericmark]

On change of occupants there should be an electrical installation condition report there are however no changes of occupant until they move in so getting an EICR does seem pointless in that they will in theory need to repeat the process. In practice often it's not done of course. But since an EICR will cost more than the other bit of paper and it is unlikely any electrician will not find some thing which does not comply then likely for you the indemnity will be less hassle and less cost.

The consumer unit looks good so would not expect to find real problems, however an electrician who is doing an EICR before a sale wants to ensure nothing can come back on him. So he is really looking for faults, once he finds a fault on a circuit he is happy as that means he does not really need to look further his EICR will be superseded by a minor works or installation certificate when faults are corrected.

So there is a chance that the house will get codes raised simply because the electrician knows it's for sale.

 

[riveralt]

Lets see.....£16 for indemnity insurance .......£100 plus for EICR.....

 

[conny]

Depends on if the buyer, or their solicitor, is willing to accept an indemnity policy.
When I sold my house last year the buyers solicitor raised an issue with the conservatory. Indemnity policy cost was £110 or retrospective building permission from the land owner, (local council), £250. I went for the policy but buyer rejected it and wanted retro permission. Had to shell out £250 but thankfully was able to cancel the indemnity and get a refund.
You need written confirmation that buyer will accept the indemnity before buying it. If they will then it will save quite a bit.

 

[JohnW2]

Tell him that hell will freeze over before you buy one, or before you drop the price by as much as 1p. ... The buyers want your house. They want it. Exploit that.

It is high risk to assume the buyers wanting it will ensure that they will buy it. If there are other houses that suit them then they may decide to go for another house.

It's obviously a risk, but I would personally say a very low one. As I've said before, I see a large number of properties being bought and sold by a family member and the nature of the properties is such that it's often apparent that electrical work (often 'notifiable' work) has been undertaken since 1st January 2005, yet no paperwork of any sort is available (and, if notifiable, the work probably was never notified).

Buyers very often try to use that as an excuse for negotiating a price reduction, but if (per BAS's advice) one makes it very clear that one is definitely not going to entertain a price reduction for that reason, the potential buyer nearly always backs down - don't forget that they will already have expended time, effort and money (solicitor's costs, probably a structural survey etc.) which we be lost/wasted if they back out of the purchase. The only important thing is for the seller to be honest.

Indemnities do work if the worst happens. Pay a few pounds and have peace of mind that any costs that might arise will be covered by the indemnity.

As far as I can see, in a situation like this, an indemnity (at least, a sensible and affordable indemnity) is only going to provide cover against risks which are almost non-existent. A house is sold 'as is', with no guarantees about the electrical installation (or anything else) - so a buyer cannot subsequently be pursued because of problems in the electrical system.

AFAICS, about the only relevant risk that is likely to be covered would relate to a local authority attempting to take action because of prior failure to notify and/or failure to comply with Part P. To all intents and purposes, that just doesn't happen and, even if it did, the action ought to be against the person who failed to notify or to comply with Part P, not a new owner of the property (despite one crazy attempt of an LA to do otherwise, which we have heard about!).

Having said all that, if the OP is correct in saying that an indemnity would only cost £16 (sounds too low to me!), and if that would make the prospective buyer happy, then, pragmatically, it would be daft not to pay the £16 to "make the issue go away"!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

That's how all blackmail and protection rackets start.

Indemnities do work if the worst happens.

In this case, what risk is being insured?

 

[JohnW2]

Depends on if the buyer, or their solicitor, is willing to accept an indemnity policy.

Well, yes, of course, but (although you apparently did it!) it would seem to make no sense to pay for an indemnity policy before ascertaining that it was going to satisfy the potential buyer! However, as I've just written, my experience is that potential buyers will nearly always 'back down' if one digs one heels in.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Indemnities do work if the worst happens.

In this case, what risk is being insured?

Exactly. As I've just written, in the context we're talking about, I think the only risk being insured against would be a vanishingly improbable one.

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

That's how all blackmail and protection rackets start.

And your point is ?

In this case, what risk is being insured?

The risk being covered is the possible expense of any legal actions and possibly also the cost of remedial work that may arise due to the lack of documentation regarding the electrical installation.

The vendor in good faith assumed the electrical installation had been properly installed by a competent electical installer and again in good faith did not obtain a certificate for the work.

The purchaser ( or their solicitor ) accept this as being the case but cannot be 100 % certain it is so they insure for the event that it is not the case.

The risk to the purchaser is that the vendor did not act in good faith and the electrical installation was not certiified because it did not meet the standard necessary for a certificate to be issued.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

And your point is ?

My point is one should not give in.

The risk being covered is the possible expense of any legal actions

And what is the risk of Building Control taking legal action against the new owner because the previous owner had work done by an electrician who did not certify the work?

and possibly also the cost of remedial work that may arise due to the lack of documentation regarding the electrical installation.

Those policies do not pay for remedial work.

The purchaser ( or their solicitor ) accept this as being the case but cannot be 100 % certain it is so they insure for the event that it is not the case.

Again, what risk does the policy cover?

The risk to the purchaser is that the vendor did not act in good faith and the electrical installation was not certiified because it did not meet the standard necessary for a certificate to be issued.

Well, that risk is not covered by an indemnity policy. Just go and read about them.

 

[bernardgreen]

BAS open up you mind to the wider picture. Building control are not the only people who may take legal action against the new owner if a defect in the non certified electrical installation has an effect on them.

Unless you read the individual policy terms of the indemnity you cannot say what it does and does not cover.

I have read a few indemnity policies. I paid for one last month for the purchaser of my late mother's house. There was an over sight in the deeds regarding access to services that may be run under the property.

The indemnity on having access to a property over land that has no registered owner provides for the cost of creating a new access to a public highway if at any time the land is claimed and ownership is proven and the owner then denies the access to the property.

 

[JohnW2]

The risk being covered is the possible expense of any legal actions and possibly also the cost of remedial work that may arise due to the lack of documentation regarding the electrical installation.

I'll re-phrase what BAS said. Unless an EICR has been undertaken which indicates than little/no remedial work will be required, I can't see any sane insurer offering an 'indemnity' policy for a premium less than the estimated cost of the remedial work. Otherwise, in the sort of position we're talking about, any buyer who knew or suspected that hundreds or thousands of pounds of work on the installation might be necessary would pay out their £100 or whatever for an indemnity, and then get the insurer to pay for the work!

In practice, it's probably really only "the possible expense of any legal actions" that is covered by any (affordable) indemnity policy - and that, as I've said is vanishingly improbable.

Kind Regards, John

 

[lasors]

Solicitor quoted the £16 when I asked for advice on this. We'll go down that route and see what happens. If they want an inspection doing I will get one done.