Hi, hoping someone can give me some clarity on what just happened.
This last Friday I did a pre-settlement inspection and discovered that a pipe had burst and top level had flooded. It had flooded for quite a while, there was mold growing on the carpet. Damage included: flooring, floor coverings, GIB wall linings, vanities, carpet and all been damaged and need replacing as a result.
Today (settlement day) I suggested holding back some money to ensure that they will remedy the damage or maybe reduce the price and I will organise tradesmen to fix it. The Vendor said no to both of these options and their lawyer advised that I must settle today and in full.
Upon talking to my lawyer, they said that yes I needed to settle today and if I wanted to get compensation for my damaged house that is something I need to do after settlement - although it will likely cost a bit given lawyers costs etc. They said, cause I didn't get a builders report, I have nothing to compare that water damaged property to.
My question is. How can this be?? It seems completely unfair. I signed up to buy a house, in similar condition to how it was when I went unconditional, yet here I am with a soaked house and facing a bill of about $15,000-$18,000.
Can someone please help? In this correct is my lawyer correct? I feel like I should have been allowed to withhold some money. If she is right, any advise on how I can go about getting money for the work I now need to do?
Many thanks.
This last Friday I did a pre-settlement inspection and discovered that a pipe had burst and top level had flooded. It had flooded for quite a while, there was mold growing on the carpet. Damage included: flooring, floor coverings, GIB wall linings, vanities, carpet and all been damaged and need replacing as a result.
Today (settlement day) I suggested holding back some money to ensure that they will remedy the damage or maybe reduce the price and I will organise tradesmen to fix it. The Vendor said no to both of these options and their lawyer advised that I must settle today and in full.
Upon talking to my lawyer, they said that yes I needed to settle today and if I wanted to get compensation for my damaged house that is something I need to do after settlement - although it will likely cost a bit given lawyers costs etc. They said, cause I didn't get a builders report, I have nothing to compare that water damaged property to.
My question is. How can this be?? It seems completely unfair. I signed up to buy a house, in similar condition to how it was when I went unconditional, yet here I am with a soaked house and facing a bill of about $15,000-$18,000.
Can someone please help? In this correct is my lawyer correct? I feel like I should have been allowed to withhold some money. If she is right, any advise on how I can go about getting money for the work I now need to do?
Many thanks.
Comment