Consumer lawyer Dean Dunham KC says buyers whose new house contains seller rubbish can seek money back for clearance costs under breach of contract rules.
The legal advice follows a query from a homebuyer who arrived at a newly purchased property to find a broken washing machine full of clothes, a broken fridge-freezer, dirty dishes and unwanted furniture.
Having paid out of pocket to clear the items, the buyer questioned whether the clearance expenses could be legally recovered from the previous owner.
Dunham stated that the buyer's legal position could be quite strong, explaining that property sellers in England and Wales are generally required to provide vacant possession on completion.
Vacant possession is a standard legal requirement in UK property transactions. It obliges the seller to hand over the property empty of people and personal belongings, allowing the new owner to move in and enjoy the home without hindrance, unless specific items were agreed to remain.
Dunham noted that dirty dishes, a broken fridge-freezer, unwanted furniture and a washing machine filled with clothes are not items a buyer should ordinarily be expected to deal with after completing a purchase.
Leaving such items behind when contractually bound to give vacant possession may constitute a breach of contract, allowing the buyer to seek recovery of reasonable removal costs as a loss caused by the breach.
However, Dunham highlighted an important caveat, advising buyers to carefully check the sale contract and the TA10 Fittings and Contents Form signed during the purchasing process to verify that no items were explicitly agreed to be left.
Checking Sale Contracts and Seeking Reimbursement
The TA10 form, issued by the Law Society, serves as the standard document in UK property transactions to specify which fixtures, fittings and contents are included or excluded from a home sale.
Where no prior agreement exists, Dunham advised affected buyers to contact the seller in writing, setting out that the property was not handed over in the agreed condition.
He recommended attaching photographs of the rubbish alongside the clearance invoice and requesting full reimbursement for the reasonable cost of removal.
Dunham cautioned buyers against overstating claims by demanding compensation for inconvenience, emphasizing that the strongest legal claim relies strictly on actual, reasonable expenses incurred in clearing up.
Public Road Parking Rights and Dropped Kerbs
In a separate case, Dunham addressed a street parking dispute raised by a reader identified as S.N. from Northampton, whose daughter faced confrontation after parking on a residential road.
The reader explained that a neighbour had recently lowered the kerb outside her property to enable access to off-road parking, even though a wall prevented vehicles from actually parking in the front garden.
The neighbour subsequently claimed that the dropped kerb created a private parking space, barring all other drivers from parking outside her house, and an egg was thrown at the daughter's car when she parked there due to a shortage of spaces.
Dunham confirmed that the neighbour is wrong, explaining that having a kerb lowered confers no legal ownership of the road and creates no private parking space for the homeowner.
Public highways remain open to all drivers, and unless specific restrictions such as yellow lines or designated residents' bays apply, anyone is generally permitted to park on the road outside a property.
He noted that the presence of a wall blocking access to the neighbour's front garden reinforced the fact that no private access was being used.
Traffic Management Act Rules and Egg Throwing Incidents
However, Dunham issued a warning regarding the distinction between parking near a dropped kerb and parking directly across the lowered footway section.
Under the Traffic Management Act 2004, parking across a dropped footway constitutes a civil parking contravention that local authorities can enforce through penalty charge notices.
He cautioned that some local councils actively enforce parking restrictions across dropped kerbs even if the householder lacks a usable driveway or has not made a formal complaint.
Because enforcement policies vary across different council areas, Dunham advised drivers to verify regulations with their local council.
Turning to the egg throwing incident, Dunham expressed serious concern, warning that throwing objects at vehicles can amount to criminal damage if harm is caused.
He added that repeated targeting of a vehicle or driver could cross the legal threshold into criminal harassment.
Dunham advised the daughter to avoid all confrontation with the neighbour, photograph the dropped kerb, the wall and any relevant road signs, and maintain a dated log of every incident.
If further incidents occur, particularly if the vehicle is damaged or the driver feels threatened, Dunham advised that the matter should be formally reported to the police.
Readers seeking consumer legal advice can submit questions to [email protected] with brief details of their issue, though the Daily Mail and This is Money note that no legal responsibility is accepted for answers provided.
