You are reading a single comment by @NickCJ and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • You say sneaky, they might think they are protecting their interests. From their POV, they probably can't entertain a situation where their liabilities are unlimited, for work that they won't ever enjoy any benefit from.

    well no. they agreed to pay for the work as a condition of sale and that’s also a condition of our accepted offer. they are sneaky by going back on their word and shifting the onus on us to make up any shortfall.
    Yes they could pull the plug but would you really want to go back on the market now when a sale was agreed back in the summer before the financial fall-out and you can have nearly half a million in the bank? they can try it on i guess but that could end up with them losing out big time with prices falling or flat over the next 6 months. all that for 2-5k?

    Edit: looks like the bill is hopefully around 8.5k they have proposed 6k we want 12k but have proposed splitting it in 2 parts so the bigger bill (6-7k?) which should arrive soon is settled and then it’s just the smaller amount retained for work that nobody knows when is likely to start.

  • they are sneaky by going back on their word and shifting the onus on us to make up any shortfall

    Lesson learned - specify the retention amount upfront next time and don’t rely on “normal practice” (because there’s no such thing).

    For what it’s worth I would be less concerned about which solicitor holds the cash (assuming theirs is a reputable outfit).

About

Avatar for NickCJ @NickCJ started