The Gazette 1978

MAY 197«

GAZETTE

Apart from the fact that the C.I.F. Scheme itself contains no warning that the public is to be asked to bear the cost of its own insurance, the manner in which the charge is apparently being communicated to purchasers is vague and potentially misleading. Summary While the C.I.F. Guarantee Scheme is very welcome, the most important shortcomings of the Scheme would appear to be: 1. that it only covers, and only to a limited extent, "major structural defects", as defined in the Scheme itself; 2. that the protection of the Scheme appears only to become available after the purchaser has failed to get satisfaction from the builder; 3. that the Scheme fails to protect the purchaser against the insolvency of the builder during the construction of the dwellinghouse; 4. that the Scheme's application to subsequent purchasers from the original purchaser of the house is unduly restricted. The Dublin Solicitors' Bar Association hopes that the C.I.F. will find it possible in the near future to extend the scope of its Guarantee Scheme to remedy the defects and omissions mentioned above and to remove the various doubts and irrationalities of practice that may result. ( I n the meantime, the Association warns its members and the public that the Scheme in its present form is by no means the solution to all potential difficulties in the purchase of new houses and that clients and the public should be warned explicitly of the Scheme's shortcomings.

the proper law of the contract was Irish, he expressly approved the decision in Barclays Bank Int. Ltd. v. Levin Bros. The plaintiff was to be awarded that amount in damages which would most fairly compensate him for the wrong which he had suffered. The English cases had demonstrated the feasibility of allowing awards to be made in foreign currencies and it was clear that given the volatility of foreign currencies an award made in sterling at the conversion rate ruling at the date of the failure to pay the debt was unjust. The decision brings us into line not only with Britain but also with Austria, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Norway, Poland, Switzerland and Israel. One slight difference between British and Irish law is that the date of payment, and therefore the conversion date, is when the court gives leave to enforce the judgment. Such leave is not provided for under the Irish rules of procedure. Under these a judgment once given is immediately payable without further order. In the opinion of McMahon J. the plaintiff was entitled to an order that the defendant do pay him ths sum due in Dutch guilders or the Irish currency equivalent thereof at the date when the judgment in default is entered. [Continued from page 82] It is further considered that the form of words used to preserve Common Law rights should be extended to provide, not merely that nothing in the Contract docu- mentation should deprive the purchaser of such rights, but that nothing in the Contract "nor in the C.I.F. Guarantee Scheme" should deprive the Purchaser of his rights at Common Law. Since the introduction of the C.I.F. Guarantee Scheme, it has received what may be described as a well- orchestrated chorus of applause from the media. Recent press comment has gone so far as to suggest that the Scheme amounts to a panacea against all past ills and that, in particular, the Scheme: (i) covers liability in the event of bankruptcy; (ii) is receiving the backing of the main building societies — the inference being that the societies would, in due course, lend only to persons buying within the terms of the Scheme. It cannot be denied that the Scheme is indeed a very welcome step forward. Any suggestion, however, that it gives total or even adequate protection to a purchaser must give rise to concern. The Association has checked with one of the leading building societies to see whether the societies had been accurately quoted as backing the Scheme. The Association was informed that the building societies do not back the Scheme in the manner suggested by the publicity. They rightly approve of the Scheme as a step forward, but there is no question of their accepting it in lieu of a purchaser's other rights, or lending only to purchasers from registered builders. It has come to the Association's knowledge that at least one large building company is charging purchasers of its newly-built houses an additional sum in excess of £60 to recoup to it a "levy" which it states it has "already paid to the National House Building Guarantee Company Limited in respect of registration and inspection fees". This levy is stated to enable the purchaser to receive a "six year structural guarantee" on the premises, instead of "the standard eighteen months warranty period".

Valuation for compensation is our business

Osborne King & Megran I

Dublin 760251 Cork 21371 Galway 65261

84