Resource library search

The customer complains that they have been treated unfairly by the developer who re-marketed the home they had reserved, although exchange of contracts and legal completion were imminent.

The customer complained that they were unable to complete their purchase because of changes in the build programme and because the developer served the completion notice after the expiry of their mortgage offer.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) that they had felt pressured into completing their purchase, and that they found a number of snags which took longer than expected to resolve.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) when their home demonstration took place on the same day as completion but wanted the developer to have fixed issues before moving in. This resulted in them paying for their rental property for longer.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) with concerns that the sanitaryware was not as described on the specification and that this had been concealed from them during the home demonstration.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) about a gas leak which was confirmed around three weeks after moving in, suspecting it was present at completion and posing a safety risk to them and surrounding properties.

The customer complained that the boiler had not been positioned correctly in their kitchen and that they had been misled about the mortgage incentive payment.

Customer complained that the developer provided inaccurate information about affordable housing near their chosen home, believing this impacted the value of their home.

The customer reserved a show home at a price which they thought reflected the value of the property, together with an additional sum for its contents. However, their mortgage valuation was considerably less than the price agreed, and although the developer paid for a second valuation to progress the sale, this was also below the agreed sale price.

Customer complained about the quality of the kitchen cabinet doors and the way in which the kitchen handles had been fitted.

The customer complained that the developer gave misleading details about the property’s nearby parking and greenspaces.

The customer complained that when they moved into the property, they noticed that a mastic bead had been applied around the perimeter of the Amtico flooring.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) that the developer lied to them about the progress of the build and moved them into unsuitable temporary accommodation.

The customer complained that the developer had not treated them fairly because they had failed to take account of the circumstances of their mortgage offer during the reservation process.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) as they considered the home they reserved was mis-sold to them as having full planning permission. They were also unhappy with the way they had been treated by the developer.

Customer complained about the information provided by the developer on covenants and their unfulfilled support promises.

The customer complained to the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS) about the appearance of the property on completion, particularly the large size of the mortar joints around the exterior.

Customer complained after learning that the developer had lowered prices on identical neighbouring homes without letting them know, believing this impacted the value of their home.

In four separate complaints raised with the New Homes Ombudsman Service (NHOS), customers expressed dissatisfaction with their developer's lack of transparency regarding multi-unit sales of properties to affordable housing providers on developments.

The customer complained that the properties built on plots adjacent to their own were closer than expected, they overlooked their property and blocked out the sun. They say that they were not given any information about the neighbouring properties by the developer, and they were concerned that their privacy was breached because of the proximity.