Small Claims Court threat

[arco]

We sold a 10 year old house in mid April through real estate agents.

Before purchasing the buyers viewed the house on several occasions with and without the real estate agent. The house was furnished at the time.

Once they had moved in with their own furniture they requested we call in at the house (on 2 occasions) to show them how to work appliances and at those times they never mentioned any problems. We even had a cup of tea with them in the lounge

Now this week, 4 months late, the buyers have come back complaining that some of the tinted window film in the lounge is breaking down, which they have stripped off themselves, and are now claiming $600 (half the cost) to replace.

Also they are going to make an additional claim for a new carpet in the lounge because of fading in an area where 2 settees and a rug were originally. (The same lounge we had a cup of tea in).

There was a small airing rack under the car port which we told them we would be removing, although we did leave the monster rotary clothes rail in the garden. Neither of these rails were on the chattels list/sale agreement, but they say they are going to make a claim for that airer as well.

None of this has been mentioned to us until yesterday. We have presently refused to pay anything - asking why they didn't mention these problems on earlier occasions.

They are now threatening legal action - do learned members think they are likely to win anything if they take us to the small claims court?

Any thoughts/suggestions/ideas would be greatly appreciated

[essence]

This sounds all a bit fishy to me.

Before purchasing the buyers viewed the house on several occasions with and without the real estate agent. The house was furnished at the time.

I think you've been really nice to allow them through the house so many times prior to sale and also without the agent. Perhaps too nice?

Once they had moved in with their own furniture they requested we call in at the house (on 2 occasions) to show them how to work appliances and at those times they never mentioned any problems. We even had a cup of tea with them in the lounge

More than what most purchasers of any property expect.

Also they are going to make an additional claim for a new carpet in the lounge because of fading in an area where 2 settees and a rug were originally. (The same lounge we had a cup of tea in).

Given that they had ample opportunity to inspect the house prior to settlement, the house would've been empty when they moved in, why didn't they say something immediately. sounds like they're trying to get you to pay for a new carpet.

There was a small airing rack under the car port which we told them we would be removing, although we did leave the monster rotary clothes rail in the garden. Neither of these rails were on the chattels list/sale agreement, but they say they are going to make a claim for that airer as well.

You've given yourself your own answer. THESE THINGS WERE NOT ON THE LIST OF CHATTELS, THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THEM.

None of this has been mentioned to us until yesterday.

How did they contact you? By phone, by email, by letter?

We have presently refused to pay anything - asking why they didn't mention these problems on earlier occasions.

Good. Don't get into negotiations with these people, it would be a sign of weakness.

They are now threatening legal action - do learned members think they are likely to win anything if they take us to the small claims court?

IMHO, I don't think they would be successful in any of the claims as listed above.

Any thoughts/suggestions/ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Do nothing. If they ring again, state that if they wish to go to Court, they are within their right to do so (as is anybody for a Small Claims Tribunal). Don't get into a discussion on the phone, this is what they want you to do. I can't stress this enough. Be polite. Be firm. Hang up if necessary. Stone-wall them. If they go ahead with proceedings, good for them. Don't worry about it, personally don't think they've got much of a case.

If they do decide to go to tribunal, you may wish to go and see a lawyer then to get advice. I don't believe lawyer's are allowed at a Tribunal hearing.

[jimO]

tell them to have sex and travel

[flyernzl]

Agree with Essence.

However - safety first - make and keep a written record, including dates and time of day, of all discussions and interactions with these people.

"At 11.07am on Monday 6th August Jim rang, spoke to me and said . . . I replied . . ."

This will be a valuable just-in-case resource, and will impress the Adjudicator if you do end up in the Disputes.

Make sure that you promise nothing, anything you do say may be held against you.

[Wayne]

agree with Essence and flyernzl - they don't have a leg to stand on and are just fishing.

[Perry]

You have some good suggestions, so far. This is one situation where you are
better off in a reactionary situation. I.e. react by doing nothing! (Except for
record keeping, as suggested.)

BTW - it's called the "Disputes Tribunal" these days. Lawyers are allowed, but
only under certain criteria, which seems to exclude you, in this matter.

[JABlog]

Normally final inspections are done on the day prior to settlement and upon you handing the keys over.

If they have accepted that everything was fine and dandy and settlement took place then there are not much anyoe can do about it.

Its a different scenario if you build and then sell.

[Xav]

Hi Arco,

Sorry to hear about your difficulties. Sounds like you have been very reasonable so far.

Now this week, 4 months late, the buyers have come back complaining that some of the tinted window film in the lounge is breaking down, which they have stripped off themselves, and are now claiming $600 (half the cost) to replace.

Also they are going to make an additional claim for a new carpet in the lounge because of fading in an area where 2 settees and a rug were originally. (The same lounge we had a cup of tea in).

Assuming your agreement was on the ADLS standard form, your obligation is to deliver the chattels to the purchaser on the settlement date "in their state of repair as at the date of agreement (fair wear and tear excepted)". Clearly you have done that. They have no basis for a claim in my opinion. It is very hard to see how they could argue otherwise when they did multiple inspections and did not complain until well after the settlement date.

There was a small airing rack under the car port which we told them we would be removing, although we did leave the monster rotary clothes rail in the garden. Neither of these rails were on the chattels list/sale agreement, but they say they are going to make a claim for that airer as well.

Whether they can make a successful claim here depends on whether the airing rack was a chattel or a fixture (you can Google the difference). It is possible it was a fixture assuming it was connected to the ceiling of the carport. How much would this thing be worth? I assume it would be next to nothing.

I agree with the other comments regarding saying as little as possible and keeping notes.

[Keys]

Do not acknowledge nor deny their claim. Do not accede to it.

To get to the Disputes Tribunal, first there must be a dispute.

Think about it.

[essence]

Very good point, Keys.

[arco]

Thanks to everyone who took the time to reply. Your comments are greatly appreciated.

There have been some very helpful points and suggestions made, and hopefully the issue will resolve in the positive.

I will post again as events unfold.

[Ivan McIntosh]

Do not acknowledge nor deny their claim. Do not accede to it.

To get to the Disputes Tribunal, first there must be a dispute.

Think about it.

This is technically true, but the Disputes Tribunal in Auckland at least - I guess it can all depend on where you are - seems to allow claims where there is no dispute whatsoever, both parties being fully in agreement that a debt is owed. The adjudicator then takes the view that the registrar of the Disputes Tribunal is the gatekeeper and if the claim got past the registrar then it counts as a dispute. We reached a mediated agreement...but that would have been fertile grounds for appeal had we wished - however who wants to go to the District Court to appeal something minor? So, defacto, non-disputes are getting through.

Also I do rather think that refusing to acknowledge or deny a claim can be taken as "disputing" it.

[Ivan McIntosh]

PS I don't think you're liable either, as per Xav's post, cept maybe if the drying rack is a fixture.