Misrepresentation

[blondelady]

Please could someone give me some advise.
At my final financial divorce hearing my barrister advised me that details in the court bundle showed I could purchase a property for between £113,000 & £135,000. They were 75% equity prices not the full asking price which I explained to her. She advised me I lacked understanding and she was correct. A consent order was signed believing her word to be the truth.
Would this amount to negligence/misrepresentation.
She is firm in her belief that she did not give incorrect advice.

[Amethyst]

Why were only 75% equity prices being quoted ? Was a 25% deposit taken into account ? Or do you mean a 75% deposit and 25% to be mortgages to achieve those figures ?

Also surely it's better to show you could only afford to purchase a property up to £135k rather than £175k or even £540k ... I guess depending what side you are on.

What does the consent order actually state with regards to house purchase ?

[blondelady]

A well known house builder sets out in their particulars 75% equity prices and the remainder is purchased on a help to buy scheme which is interest free for the first five years.

The house prices were taken into account to work out what my lump sum to buy a house would be. My barrister took the 75% figure into account and therefore I did not receive enough to purchase a property but she advised me she was correct and I did not understand.

[2222]

A well known house builder sets out in their particulars 75% equity prices and the remainder is purchased on a help to buy scheme which is interest free for the first five years.

The house prices were taken into account to work out what my lump sum to buy a house would be. My barrister took the 75% figure into account and therefore I did not receive enough to purchase a property but she advised me she was correct and I did not understand.

The help to buy scheme provides a 20% loan, not 25%. So this all sounds a bit wrong to me.

However, to take out the HTB loan, one of the requirements is that you borrow at least 25% on a conventional loan.

Some of the builders quote on the basis of a 75% mortgage, a 5% deposit, and 20% HTB loan. Could you say which builder it was please.

I don't see how we can say that the barrister was wrong without knowing what was being aimed at, and you have not explained that - at least not in a way I understand. I think you may have expected a house purchased outright for you, but possibly the joint finances did not stretch to that?

[blondelady]

It doesn't really matter how or why the house particulars were 75% equity properties, but that is what they were.

I am asking was she wrong to advise me that a house could be purchased outright I.e mortgage free £113/135,000 when these were 75% equity prices.

The joint finances far exceeded that, over 1million. My barrister was advising me to meet my needs I would require £113/135,000 when in truth I needed another 25% to purchase a house outright with no mortgage

So I am asking was she negligent in giving me incorrect advise? Hope that makes it clear.

[blondelady]

[2222]

It doesn't really matter how or why the house particulars were 75% equity properties, but that is what they were.

I am asking was she wrong to advise me that a house could be purchased outright I.e mortgage free £113/135,000 when these were 75% equity prices.

The joint finances far exceeded that, over 1million. My barrister was advising me to meet my needs I would require £113/135,000 when in truth I needed another 25% to purchase a house outright with no mortgage

So I am asking was she negligent in giving me incorrect advise? Hope that makes it clear.

If she gave you incorrect advice, she may have been negligent.