Charlotte Davies has settled a property misrepresentation claim pleaded at over £200,000.00, within days of trial, after a protracted dispute lasting four years.
The claim arose following the purchase of a barn conversion in2020 by the Claimants from the Defendants. The Defendants had purchased a number of farm buildings prior to 2008 and converted them into residential dwellings. The First Defendant owned a construction company and undertook the work himself. Three of the four dwellings were sold and the Defendants retained the fourth, the property in question, and rented it out to tenants. For a time, and immediately prior to sale to the Claimants, the Defendants lived in the property. During the conveyancing process, the Defendants represented that there had been no previous flooding to the property.
Shortly after the purchase, it was claimed that the property flooded following significant rainfall which had caused water to pool in the garden and then ingress into the building, causing internal damage to the walls, floor, and decor. The Claimants claimed that a further severe flood event occurred a year later, albeit water ingress into the property was prevented on that occasion by the use of pumps. Contrary to the Claimants' case, the Defendants denied knowledge of any previous flooding, and further put the Claimants to proof on the fact and cause of any flooding since the sale. The Claimants argued that not only had the Defendants been aware of the flooding problems, but that they had actively undertaken remedial works to cover-up previous damage.
Complex evidence on drainage and hydrology was required from expert engineers with the reports dealing with the sufficiency of the surface water drainage system at the property, as well as providing opinion on the impact of rainfall, groundwater levels, and the topography of the site and surrounds. Expert evidence was also required from surveyors to assist the court in determining the diminution in value claim, as well as the extent and cost of rectification and remediation works, the latter of which had been pleaded as an alternative measure of loss.
There was a significant dispute over the cost of any remediation works required, with the parties' respective experts suggesting different solutions for works to the property's drainage system.
Mitigation of loss was also an issue, the Claimants having received an insurance payout from their buildings insurer which they say only partially covered their actual losses. The Defendants also sought to argue that the titles to the other properties on the site contained covenants under which the respective registered proprietors were obligated to contribute to any necessary works to the drainage system.
Further claimed losses included the cost of relocation/decampment whilst works were undertaken, the cost of various investigations and surveys, damage to furniture, increased insurance premiums, and costs and expenses relating to the securing of the insurance payout.
The week-long multi track trial was due to involve fourteen witnesses (with a further two witness summaries), including previous tenants, neighbours, and tradespeople, as well as oral evidence from the four experts.
Charlotte acted for the Claimants and was instructed by Ben Sidgwick, Associate Solicitor in the Dispute Resolution Team, at Coodes LLP.
Charlotte has a busy and diverse civil practice, with specialist areas that include land, property and contractual matters.
If you wish to discuss anything in this article or you want to instruct Charlotte you can contact her clerk on jamie@kbgchambers.co.uk.
