Buying a house

kerdiff

I'm buying a house wit a bit of land, the auctioneer said there was 2.9 acres of land with it but I did my own investigations and found out that it's only 2 acres, apart from pulling out of the deal (I really want this house) is there anything I can do. TIA.

Peregrinus

Well, assuming you haven't signed a contract yet, you can go back and revise your offer downwards on the basis of the true area of the land. Of course, you risk losing the sale if you do that.

The bottom line here is that the extra 0.9 of an acre does not exsit. The property will never be any bigger than it is now. You either want to buy it for the originally-agreed price, or you want to buy it but for a lower price, or you don't want to buy it. I don't see that there are any other possibilities.

davo10

Check the site map, that outlines th site. You can get that from the EA or the ordinance survey.

https://www.osi.ie/

An acre is a huge difference, are you sure it's not a typo on the info sheet, 2.9 instead of 2.0.

kerdiff

I'm measured the site through the land registry and it's 2 acres. The auctioneer said that they didn't measure the site that they just took the vendors word for it. Surely thats the auctioneers job to check the land before advertising the house.

myshirt

kerdiff wrote: »

I'm measured the site through the land registry and it's 2 acres. The auctioneer said that they didn't measure the site that they just took the vendors word for it. Surely thats the auctioneers job to check the land before advertising the house.

No, not at all. It's a guide as to particulars, not a legal warranty.

kerdiff

I know it's not a warranty but they should have at least have their facts right before advertise, if that was the case then people could advertise that they own the field next to them and it's up to the buyer for find if it's part of the sale. I just think it's wrong false advertising.

myshirt

kerdiff wrote: »

I know it's not a warranty but they should have at least have their facts right before advertise, if that was the case then people could advertise that they own the field next to them and it's up to the buyer for find if it's part of the sale. I just think it's wrong false advertising.

It's not.

There is an obligation on you to educate yourself on what is reasonable at what stage in a commercial process, and how to use information in front of you. That applies to anything.

What you are proposing (and imposing) is zero responsibility for you and a responsibility to provide absolute assurance for everyone else. If the industry was to sweat the bollox out of everything like you wished, it'd be a disaster.

The time and place to start validation of particulars and title is after you are serious about buying.

If you have a problem here, pull out and move on and stop the complaining.

Get a survey done and then renegotiate the price.

atilladehun

myshirt wrote: »

It's not.

There is an obligation on you to educate yourself on what is reasonable at what stage in a commercial process, and how to use information in front of you. That applies to anything.

What you are proposing (and imposing) is zero responsibility for you and a responsibility to provide absolute assurance for everyone else. If the industry was to sweat the bollox out of everything like you wished, it'd be a disaster.

The time and place to start validation of particulars and title is after you are serious about buying.

If you have a problem here, pull out and move on and stop the complaining.

This is a bit mad. There's loads of things that have to be described correctly when selling.
the weight of food
the combination of fabrics in clothing
the amount of liquid in cleaning products
the size of an engine

If there isn't legislation requiring this to be accurate then there should be.

This isn't absolving the buyer of responsibility, there's a huge amount in buying property that a buyer should be taking a detailed investigation but the basics of advertised size should be legally accurate. It's often the headline in an ad selling property which draws people to investigate the rest.

jimmycrackcorm

atilladehun wrote:

If there isn't legislation requiring this to be accurate then there should be.

Caveat Emptor is a long established principle.

Alkers

You can't force them to produce the extra bit of land so you're only option is to reduce your offer accordingly. You could complain about the agent if you are so inclined but it won't change anything in terms of your sale.

As an aside, I know of an auctioneer in Dublin recently who refused to increase the advertised square footage of a property from the size he had measured when he looked at the house. It took production of the original construction drawings for him to agree to change and this wasn't a big increase by any means. In comparison it does seem unreasonable of the agent in your case.

godtabh

Standard would be to go sale agreed subject to survey. Get the survey and negotiate based on that

davo10

atilladehun wrote: »

This is a bit mad. There's loads of things that have to be described correctly when selling.
the weight of food
the combination of fabrics in clothing
the amount of liquid in cleaning products
the size of an engine

If there isn't legislation requiring this to be accurate then there should be.

This isn't absolving the buyer of responsibility, there's a huge amount in buying property that a buyer should be taking a detailed investigation but the basics of advertised size should be legally accurate. It's often the headline in an ad selling property which draws people to investigate the rest.

Firstly, normal consumer legislation does not apply to property purchase. You have the benefit of legal representation and a survey before you buy.

Secondly, another poster may be able to link you to the case, there was a recent court case where a property size was not as advertised, the judge dismissed the case and said it was up to the buyer to confirm the spec of the property before purchase.

riclad

The agent takes the info the seller gives him,
its up to the buyer to get a survey done.
When buying a house with land around it,the solicitor should make sure he has all the documents that describe the boundarys around the house.
with the map and make sure its correct.
Reduce your offer .
How much is an acre of land worth in that area.

Peregrinus

davo10 wrote: »

Firstly, normal consumer legislation does not apply to property purchase. You have the benefit of legal representation and a survey before you buy.

This.

Plus, specifically in relation to the area of the property, before you contract you (or your lawyer) will have sight of the title deeds, which will in nearly all cases state the area of the property. So while a misstated area in advertising is very annoying, and I think a sloppy practice on the part of the estate agent, it doesn't really threaten you any great harm, just annoyance.

And, on the plus side, it gives you some leverage to go back and reopen the question of the purchase price fairly late on in the process, which you may or many not choose to do, but at least you have the leverage.

riclad

My deeds do not state the size of the property ,
it says on the left boundary, j.jones . on the right ,j,smith, at the rear , j,collins .But i did not buy a house with 2 or 3 acres around it.
i made up those names ,as i don,t have the deeds in front of me.
Theres no reference to the size of the garden .
Theres 7 ft brick walls on all sides around the garden ,so the boundarys are obvious .
each name on the deeds has an adress eg j.smith ,no 23 earl street.etc
Until the contract is signed you can stop the purchase going forward,
But it sounds like you want a reduction of the price .