Buying a house, solicitor raises his fee

B

Bonzo76

Registered User
Messages
5
I am buying a house and it is taking forever, I went with a solicitor as he was recommended to me, he quoted me €950 + VAT.

March 2012 I paid the deposit and then the problems started. Had a snaglist done up and the builder took 12 months to have the work done, when I got the engineer to check to make sure the work was done to standard he said that only some work was carried out and that there was still work to be carried out.

The builder really stalled after that using various excuses as to why he wasn't getting the works done in time. Then he went into receivership.

Between Dec 2013 and Dec 2014 the receiver did not reply to one call or one email that my solicitor sent them. Then in Dec 2014 the receiver finally started communicating with us and was now ready to proceed with the purchase.

But now my solicitor is saying that the agreed price of €950 + VAT for his work isn't enough and that he should charge me triple but might 'only' charge me double as it is nearly 3 years now that this purchase is ongoing and that the €950 + VAT was based on the purchase taking such time as a purchase of a house should.

But from day one I have been ready to purchase, the delay has not been down to me, It is because of the builder and the receiver that this is taking so long.
So has the solicitor the right to now want more than what he quoted me in March 2012 ?
 
I assume the solicitor had extra work due to the issues involved, so they are within their rights to charge extra. Best to negotiate with them in a business like manner and they may well reduce further.
 
Hi. Under the Solicitors Act, the sol. is obliged to provide you with a section 68 letter setting out either actual charges or an estimate of charges and/or setting out the manner in which charges/fees will be applied. Have they complied with this?
 
It is more than likely that the solicitor did send an estimate- however that is just that- an estimate. Normally these contain a proviso that in the event of additional work, there will be an additional fee. I do want to add however, that even where a solicitor does not send an estimate or agree a figure in advance for whatever reason, they are still entitled to charge for the extra work- the fact that they did not send the estimate is considered a misdemeanor by the law society but it does not invalidate their right to charge for work done.
 
Vanilla said:
It is more than likely that the solicitor did send an estimate- however that is just that- an estimate. Normally these contain a proviso that in the event of additional work, there will be an additional fee. I do want to add however, that even where a solicitor does not send an estimate or agree a figure in advance for whatever reason, they are still entitled to charge for the extra work- the fact that they did not send the estimate is considered a misdemeanor by the law society but it does not invalidate their right to charge for work done.
Click to expand...


+ 1
 
Vanilla, Thank you for your reply. There would indeed have been extra work involved as this purchase is taking considerably longer than it should, nearly 3 years now so there would obviously be more correspondence between my solicitor and the builders solicitor and then receiver once the builder went into receivership than there would have been if this purchase had taken a few months rather than nearly 3 years.
I guess I had presumed that the quote should stand as this delay hasn't been down to me. I will take you advice and try to negotiate once the solicitor emails me their revised cost.

serotoninsid, Thank you for your reply. As it's been nearly 3 years I simply don't remember if I received a section 68 letter or not, I'd have to have a root about the house to see if I've placed it somewhere.
 
If a tradesman quotes a price for a job and subsequently discovers that there is more work involved than he expected when he quoted, that is generally considered to be his problem, he should have made more effort to understand the work involved when he prepared his quote.

Members of the professions generally quote based on the time taken to complete the task, so that effectively they can charge what they like.

If your solicitor quoted a set price to do the conveyancing then he should abide by his quote, even if the work took longer than he initially expected.

The professions have been wrapped in cotton wool for too long in this country, time they were forced to accept the consequences of their decisions like any one else.
 
If a tradesman quotes a price for a job and subsequently discovers that there is more work involved than he expected when he quoted, that is generally considered to be his problem, he should have made more effort to understand the work involved when he prepared his quote.
Click to expand...
Depends on your definition of more work involved. If he finds some unforeseen problems with foundations or walls he will inform you and give a further estimate based on that which is reasonable. The length of time to the solicitor here would not be an issue. It's the extra work in searches and correspondance that is the issue i.e. work actually done. My understanding would be that it's covered by the 'plus outlays' part of the price anyway and I would not find it unreasonable for the solicitor to ask for more money.
 
elcato said:
If he finds some unforeseen problems with foundations or walls he will inform you and give a further estimate based on that which is reasonable.
Click to expand...

This is not the case for any of the three standard construction contracts in this country, they each require a tradesman to look into a job and satisfy themselves that they know what is involved, if they miss anything that is their cost.

Generally the legal profession is not held to such a high standard.
 
Bonzo76 said:
serotoninsid, Thank you for your reply. As it's been nearly 3 years I simply don't remember if I received a section 68 letter or not, I'd have to have a root about the house to see if I've placed it somewhere.
Click to expand...
What vanilla said re. they are still entitled to payment is correct. However, did they update you on costs as you proceeded?

That said, I'm really wasting your time because of this =>
cremeegg said:
Generally the legal profession is not held to such a high standard.
Click to expand...


Self regulation means no regulation. Even if that changes, they are already lobbying that the independent regulator that may (if it ever transpires) be set up as per the Legal Services Bill - should be staffed with Law Society staff - presumably so that they can establish a certain culture within that organisation from day one...
join the dots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top