Your entire post is very difficult to follow. But on this point - what undertaking? The one that the solicitor had with the bank?I am not sure Firstly where I stand legally in relation to the solicitor hired on mortgage drawdown and undertaking on property that’s non-compliant or fit for purpose
In my eyes these professionals were paid in full for protecting my interests provided an undertaking and had a duty of care to me which they totally did not provide,
RedOnion has identified the real issue here. Your solicitor was probably required to provide a Certificate of Title/Marketability to the bank. If he did provide such a certificate then it was obviously misleading. Your original bank should have sued the solicitor.When it comes to a mortgage, the solicitors responsibilities are to the bank, to ensure the bank has security by way of charge on the property.
I have a high court case ongoing but his insurance company were allowed off record as they claimed he wouldn’t co operate with themYour only valid target is the architect who failed to oversee the build and ensure it was in compliance. If the contract was that he would oversee the build, then you should have been taking a case against him and his insurance to have the compliance issues rectified.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?