This is untrue - I have yet to see of anyone who has been taken to court. If you have not put in a defence then the developers can apply for Specific Performance. Courts are extremely unlikely to award this and will award damages based on losses and take into consideration the finances of both parties. The developer must prove what his loss is.

If , like in our situation you have put in a defence there is no automatic right for the developer apply for specific performance. We are being taken to court in November and have put in a defence. The only case law that I have found in a falling market is as I have mentioned above the case in New Zealand in which the purchasers had their deposit returned due to the msleading nature of advertising. Our defence is based on misleading advertising and discrepencies in the contract.

I understand other people have had court dates set but am unaware of any one who has had a decision made yet.

I have just checked out the website for this law firm. They seem to specialise in work with large building firms and developers - great way to get new clients I think by encouraging them to persue frustrated purchasers. This is a very one sided article and I am suprised that there is no balance to it. It is not a 'forgone conclusion' that the developers will win in court - there are defences and people are quite within their rights to challenge. Can ANYONE tell of these 100s of cases this guy quotes? I think not. There is a lot of scare tactics going on to get people to complete - by whatever method is possible - taking on mortgages with terrible penalties, borrowing from friends and parents - given that they have 'no defence'. These apartments were packaged as 'safe and secure' investments - people were encouraged to buy with small deposits - the developers knew what they were doing and these marketing stratergies are counter to EU law- hence the ONLY precedent I can find which is a recent case in New Zealand in which the buyers GOT THEIR DEPOSITS BACK due to the over optimistic nature of the advertisng material that persuaded them to buy the property.

Good luck with your defence although this is of course a decision reached under Australian Law, (The New South Wales Supreme Court), and sets no precedent in English Law. If I may ask, what kind of statements made by the agents are you relying on?

In the case in question, the claimants relied on this kind of advertisment:

"Victoria Park BRAND NEW OFFER FORM

One area which was acclaimed by Sydney Morning Herald to be the number one district amongst three areas which is going to double in value in five years...

Extremely low property management fees (around $410 for two bedrooms) in gardenesque living environment...

Extremely convenient transportation, a modern multi-functional building combining residential, commercial, retail, entertainment and community services. Offer job opportunities to 8,000 to 10,000 people. A reliable guarantee for leasing opportunities...

Our well trained investment consultant will provide service, professionally analyse your financial status, answer all your inquiries with regards to the investment and tax, set your future investment plan, help you easily step onto your path to wealth.."..

The court made its decision on the following points:

• the article which the agent referred to in the advertisement in September 2003 was in fact published in February 2002 and was well out of date by September 2003 as the property market had shown substantial growth over that period, such that by 2003 the supply of apartments in Zetland was in fact saturated;
• the newspaper article did not actually say that Zetland was the primary suburb where values were expected to double in five years. It claimed that all three suburbs would double in value; and
• the essence of the article was that the higher priced new developments would increase the values for the suburb as a whole and not that the individual units in the highly priced new developments would double in five years.

It seems that the court felt there had been some very agressive marketing of this development compounded by some fairly negligent mistakes made by the agents.

I agree that this doen not set a precedent in the UK but there is no precedent here at the momemt and NZ is based on English Law. In fact EU directives are much tougher on what is classed as acceptable marketing - eg disclaimers must be given equal promotion as the advert itself eg risks on investments. Many developments have been sold in an equally if more aggressive way and will be interesting to see how the courts react. Recent case law has taken a very hard view on misselling eg endowements and insurance on loans.

I am afraid that you are wrong here; there is considerable precedent in this field. The court can make an Order for the return of deposits under s.49(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925. This will only be done in exceptional circumstances where there is some fault (and a high level of fault is required) on the part of the seller. see Aribisala v. St. James Homes (Court of Appeal 2007).

The NZ case is of persuasive precedent only and is clearly distinguishable on its own facts.

If there has been mis-selling, misrepresentation or any REAL Defences to be alleged against the developer, that is an entirely different matter.

Hi Phyllis

I am in exactly the same position as you in the Spectrum projetc and am really really worried about how it is all going? I even have concerns about my solicitors who are Colemans?

I would really like to get in touch with you and if possible join in any action you are planning to take against the developer.

Dear Phyllis and Kat 13

I am a Barrister and have had considerable experience in the problem of current completions. I would be happy for you to contact me but clearly cannot give my personal details on this forum.

Do you have any suggestions in how we can converse one to one?

Regards

Claradam:

Dear Phyllis and Kat 13

Do you have any suggestions in how we can converse one to one?

The only option I can think of is for Phyllis and Kat 13 to add an email address to their profile. They can do this by editing their community profile when logged in. The edit button is on the community page http://www.moneysupermarket.com/c/news-and-community .

Then when this is done, Claradam, you can see their email address if you click on the forum names shown on the left hand side of their posts. You can then if you wanted, send them an e-mail with your contact details.

This is probably preferable to you, than having your details on this forum. As a barrister if you did this, you might get lots of other e-mails.

Huckster

you could also log on to the berkeley homes collective site on yahoo

Hi All

Can't complete? Builder rescinded contracts? Legal threats?

The Berkeley Homes Collective is made up of homebuyers like you. We're being hounded by Berkeley Homes who have rescinded our contracts and run off with our deposits.

Our next meeting will be held at the Crosse Keys pub near Bank tube in London on Saturday 19th Sept @ 12pm. Please see the web site for directions (click on our username on the left and you'll find our details in our profile). The meeting will be held in the conference room at the back.

Bloomberg have asked if they can join us that day and will be coming along at 1pm. They will be looking for volunteers to talk to them on and off camera for a programme they are making looking at the new build crisis and how its affecting real people, in contrast to all the rosy results CEO's like Tony Pidgley have been announcing in recent weeks and proclaiming there isn't a problem in the new build sector. As we know, there are two sides to every story so please do come along and talk to the crew if you want to.

This will be an open meeting, so those of you dealing with other builders are also welcome to attend.

---

I have set up new discussion forum on the Berkeley Collective Homes website with a view to trying to progress discussions. Please Claradam can you post to this forum? Many thanks

Kat

Please can someone give me some advice long story cut short basically i brought an off plan flat in Leeds in 2006 from a company who brought flats from the developers. This company also appointed a solicitor to act on our behalf. When i went to sign the first contract my solicitor failed to tell me that i was entering into a legally binding contract . I also paid my solicitor 10% deposit of the purchase price and i recently discovered that the developers only recieved 5% of it. I have been decieved by the solicitor and the company who i brought the flat off as a result the developers took me to court and they have now issued a summary judgement against me ! Does anyone know what i can do now? Please help me !!!

Hi guys. Rhetorically, do we have any people who bought in the St James' Silkworks development out there? If you've not already done so then head over to the berkeleyhomescollective, verify yourself under the REGISTER tab and use the dedicated group forum to discuss what your plan of action is with your fellow Silkworks homebuyers. Rgs SD

A professional negligence solicitors is looking at a class action against certain developers and property clubs for over valuing buy to let properties.

This is what they state on their website:-

'Inside Track, Property Investment Club and Challenor Property Developments, brokers such as Dylan Harvey and developers such as Dandara and Bovis Homes are names that appear time and time again. It is clear that certain surveyors routinely supplied inaccurate valuations which mis-led buyers.

Hi, I have been with my solicitor to-day, as I have been refused Legal Aid she has suggested that I settle with the builder George Wimpy,as she reckons I have no defence. (This is the reason I was refused Legal Aid!) It would appear that I have no option other than to come to a deal with Wimpy or go bust????