getting keys before completion

anon131120

last week, the foreman of the new build that we are buying gave us the keys to our future property (adfter signing contracts, but before completion and drawdown) so we can install and fit floors, kitchen, bathrooms, etc. I was wondering how common this is? I am thinking not common at all. Is there anything I would need to be wary about?

3DataModem

I've done this. There are risks.

1. What happens if one of the tradesmen slips and falls?
- You technically cannot insure the house without owning it.

2. What happens if they cause a leak or a fire that damages the house?

3. If the sale falls through, the floors, kitchen, bathrooms, etc don't belong to you.

anon131120

Never thought of insurance. The foreman gave us permission anyway for carrying the works from the beginning, even before handing the keys. should this not be enough? Regarding losing the floors, bathrooms and all that, we are aware of it, but it is an unlikely scenario. I'd be worried more about losing the 35k of the 10% deposit if it falls through

3DataModem

anon131120 wrote: »

Never thought of insurance. The foreman gave us permission anyway for carrying the works from the beginning, even before handing the keys. should this not be enough? Regarding losing the floors, bathrooms and all that, we are aware of it, but it is an unlikely scenario. I'd be worried more about losing the 35k of the 10% deposit if it falls through

That was my logic, so we laid 7k of floors, carpets, etc the week of completion.

Dav010

3DataModem wrote: »

I've done this. There are risks.

1. What happens if one of the tradesmen slips and falls?
- You technically cannot insure the house without owning it.

2. What happens if they cause a leak or a fire that damages the house?

3. If the sale falls through, the floors, kitchen, bathrooms, etc don't belong to you.

While the developer still owns the property, wouldn’t they have liability insurance? The tradesmen are in there with the developers permission assuming the foreman can grant it on their behalf.

If you cause a leak, personally I’d prefer it to be while the builders are still on site, you would have to be pretty paranoid to worry about burning the house down.

It’s up to the buyer to ensure the sale doesn’t fall through after contracts are signed, if it does, they could be on the hook for a lot more than the cost of the bits put in.

anon131120

I think as well that the risk is minimal. It's nice to have them

antiskeptic

I used a commercial level solicitor for a few house buys/sells - very much more clued in and professional that run of the mill solicitors used at other times. They insisted (i.e. "if you don't take our advice you need to mail us as to your free choice not to take our advice") I take out insurance cover on a property purchase from the moment of contract signing.

The contract you sign and are required to complete on, is to buy house x. If house x suffers from water damage post contract signing, you've committed to buy house x. There is nothing in the contract which says you are buying house x without water damage.

The point was that you are tied into a binding contract and should anything happen between contract sign and getting the keys, then you're at least partially on the hook.

3DataModem

antiskeptic wrote: »

I used a commercial level solicitor for a few house buys/sells - very much more clued in and professional that run of the mill solicitors used at other times. They insisted (i.e. "if you don't take our advice you need to mail us as to your free choice not to take our advice") I take out insurance cover on a property purchase from the moment of contract signing.

The contract you sign and are required to complete on, is to buy house x. If house x suffers from water damage post contract signing, you've committed to buy house x. There is nothing in the contract which says you are buying house x without water damage.

The point was that you are tied into a binding contract and should anything happen between contract sign and getting the keys, then you're at least partially on the hook.

Not always the case. The contract I signed was to purchase the land, and to engage the developer to build the house. That meant I had some additional protections and responsibilities.

cubatahavana

3DataModem wrote: »

Not always the case. The contract I signed was to purchase the land, and to engage the developer to build the house. That meant I had some additional protections and responsibilities.

Interesting thread. Could the OP start living in the house as they are committed to buy after signing contracts? I know nobody would do this, but I wonder from a legal point of view, what would the implications be