No deposit collected for the sale of my home

[Wert]

Appreciate any feedback or view that can be offered.
We put our Melbourne home on the market in Feb of this year and achieved a sale in May. The purchaser paid an initial $1400.00 against the contract with an agreed purchase price and 10% deposit required subsequent to a pest inspection. The inspection was completed and passed and also the 3 business days cooling off period making the contract unconditional with a 90 day settlement.
Accepting a significant number of excuses from the purchaser, the estate agent, our conveyancer and the purchasers conveyancer did not collect the 10% deposit and it was not until 41 days after the signing of the contract that we were advised that we could issue a notice of default and make claim to interest on the missing deposit money.
The purchaser continued to make excuses for conditions that restricted them from not being able to pay the deposit including a death in the family, term deposits waiting to mature, waiting on a property settlement after a divorce and may others, none of which turned out to be true.
To cut a long story short, at around the 80 day mark, it was finally learned that the purchaser had no money, never intended to pay the deposit, never intended to purchase in the first place and had conned a colleague into providing the original $1400.00. A scam that has all but ruined our lives, put us back on the market, not able to get the original price, commited to a new purchase of land, paying additional interest on two properities, two sets of rates etc. etc. etc. We understand thay have done this a number of times in Melbourne.
As the purchaser has no money, there is little point into taking legal action against them. We did put them on TV on ACA but apart from that exposure, they get off scott free.
Does anyone have any similar experience and what were your actions.
Can we take any action against the estate agent and/or conveyaners for lack of due diligence and protecting our interests?
Appreciate any input that may be out there.

 

[TMNT]

so they actually did appear (unwillingly) on ACA/National Tv???

and what benefit do they get by stuffing people around by pretending to buy a house?

 

[DaveM]

The contract should never have gone unconditional without the deposit being paid.

 

[Macca]

I actually saw the ACA bit on these people, kind of weird.

As they have no money it is useless chasing them and I think it would be simply not worth the effort to chase the others through court for an unlikely win, no harm in asking though.

One thing I do know is that I would not be using any of those people again

 

[Aaron_C]

Maybe it is Schadenfreude?

 

[Terry_w]

Sue your conveyancer?

 

[Blurbman]

The only person you may have a chance against would be the conveyancer. Depends upon whether you agreed to the delays in paying the deposit after being fed the excuses.

Don't forget, you also have the role of checking the progress of the sale and payments. It's like those people who complain that a property manager did not tell them that rent hadn't been paid for months. I would notice rent not being paid immediately, and chase the PM myself.

Good luck though.

 

[Ausprop]

you should probably bankrupt them as a way to try stop them doing it again. Faced with bankruptcy they may suddenly find some money anyway

 

[jackbak]

you should probably bankrupt them as a way to try stop them doing it again. Faced with bankruptcy they may suddenly find some money anyway

That will just put Wert in a worse position after spending another $5k to bankrupt them. Unfortunately there's probably not much they can do at all as cops don't want to know about these matters and the other party have no money.

 

[Ausprop]

That will just put Wert in a worse position after spending another $5k to bankrupt them. Unfortunately there's probably not much they can do at all as cops don't want to know about these matters and the other party have no money.

am sure they will come up with way more than $5k to avoid bankruptcy. And I would hit the conveyancer up for a quick $20k too

 

[Wert]

We have looked into these people (mother and daughter) and they have nothing. Live in government sponsered housing, collecting welfare, limited transport, nothing to make a claim against. Spending any money to try and sort them out will be, seemingly, good money after bad. The freud squad are awae of them however, there is little they can do in instances like this as they have not broken the law in terms of, there is nothing to inhibit anyone from agreeing to, and signing a contract of sale, and not completing it understanding that the seller my elect to sue you for the breach. In this instance, they have nothing to sue for. It would be good money after bad.

Thank you all for your input, views and feedack so far. Cheers.

 

[S.T]

The freud squad are awae of them however, there is little they can do in instances like this.

That Freud squad are scary, asking so many questions about your childhood! Have comfy couches though.

 

[pully]

odd story. inability/unwilling to pay the deposit would have been a red flag of trouble. would not be using that selling agent again either.

how was the 1400 figure considered? sorry you had this experience and better luck next time. perhaps a warning to others too.

did not see the tv show, did it explain why the couple signed contracts to buy property with no intention to buy? time wasters at best.

 

[Jake D]

That Freud squad are scary, asking so many questions about your childhood! Have comfy couches though.

I'm pretty sure that was just a fraudian slip.

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

I'm trying to figure out why they'd even put a contract on a house if they don't have any money. From there point of view this whole thing sounds like a waste of time and $1400.

Unfortuantely for the OP, I don't think there's much point in persuing them. Perhaps the REA or conveyancer. For the most part it might be best to simply move on and try sell the house to someone else. Negotiate hard with the agent to waive or reduce their fees at this point.

 

[Wert]

As far as we can assess from all those eventually involved, including feedback from others who have been scammed as well, they get the satisfaction of being treated as an important possible buyer in a nice house and the pleasure of ruining the lives of those that they consider as being the "haves" as they consider themselves as the "have nots".
We learn that they have done this a number of time and in one instance signed a contract for a multi million dollar home in Brighton, didn't pay, put the vendor in a position of being in default in the purchase of a new property, that cost then close to 100K in penalties and may have broken a marriage also.

The original $1400 was someone elses money which is the only amount that was paid.

 

[Ausprop]

well at the very least get a judgement against them, at least that's on their credit file, then perhaps a DIY means enquiry, make them squirm a bit there and consider if there are any assets worth seizing or wages that could be garnished

also a visit from the bailiff may get them to bankrupt themselves

 

[KPDN]

Do the Right thing !

I really find this case intriguing as it compels us to think outside the typical take them to the cleaners.

We live in a world that is so easy to condemn and chase someone for payback, but we really do need to consider who was at fault.

You can certainly try and hit the agent or the conveyancer, but that is going to be more work than reward...as the enforcing authority will ask you to consider what you have lost.

The property can go back on the market, with a different agent and use a solicitor this time - not a conveyancer.

I think the stress of the whole episode is where the biggest cost has been - see if you can get a compensation lawyer to see if they can get a claim against the PI of the conveyancer or the Agent.

All the best, you probably need it!

 

[Sove18a]

I did see this story on ACA as the vendors conveyancer that appeared on it was the same one I used a few years ago.

A pest inspection was done - was this paid for by the purchaser? If the purchaser had no intention of paying any money (as they had no money) for this house then why did they pay for a pest inspection? That is just throwing money away!

I'm a bit confused regarding suing the conveyancer. Which conveyancer, the vendors or the purchasers? How can the conveyancer possibly know that the purchaser had no intention of paying the deposit? Correct me if I'm wrong, the deposit money is paid directly to the REA by the purchaser not via the conveyancer.

 

[jackbak]

well at the very least get a judgement against them, at least that's on their credit file, then perhaps a DIY means enquiry, make them squirm a bit there and consider if there are any assets worth seizing or wages that could be garnished

also a visit from the bailiff may get them to bankrupt themselves

You'd be looking at around $2k to get the judgement and it sounds like it would be pointless as the purchaser "has no money" and it was a "scam", so if you have piles of cash floating around and it's a matter of principle then you might as well sue them and bankrupt them but it sounds like it would be a mistake to do this for financial reasons because you'd be throwing good money after bad.