A chemist yesterday won the right to purchase her first home at the original price from the developers, who had attempted to withdraw from the sale so they could sell the £66,000 apartment to another couple.
Ms Clare Murphy (29), from Cobh, paid a £2,000 deposit to a Cork auctioneering firm for the two-bedroomed ground floor apartment at The Headlands, Wilton, in June 1997.
In early September a letter was faxed to her solicitor's office informing her that the developer, Pierce Construction, was not proceeding with the sale and requesting the return of documents including the contracts for sale.
Ms Murphy called to her solicitor, Mr John Boylan, two hours later to sign the contract and to pay a further £5,000 to the developer. She decided to sign the contract anyway and to pay over the money.
"It was like a shot out of the blue and the news reduced her to tears," Mr Pat Horgan, her counsel, told Cork Circuit Civil Court.
Mr Horgan said that a letter dated April 22nd, 1998, sent by solicitor Mr Carl O'Mahony of James O'Mahony and Co, representing the developer, to Mr Brendan O'Shea and Ms Mary Beth Rodgers of Waterfall, Co Cork, said they had made an attempt to pursue an apartment for them at The Headlands.
"I went out of my way to try and pursue an apartment for you and in fact I gave an ultimatum to one of the purchasers who had not yet signed up the contract and when the ultimatum expired I was then in a position to offer the apartment to Brendan," stated the letter. The letter added that because proceedings were issued they were not in a position to complete the sale. "I was hoping the original purchasers would accept the refund of their deposit which would clear the way to enable me to sell the apartment to you," it continued.
Ms Murphy told the court that after deciding to purchase one of the apartments, now valued at £95,000, she proceeded to engage Mr Boylan as her solicitor, arranged a mortgage with Bank of Ireland, secured insurance in respect of the loan and the contents of her new home, hired an engineer to look after the various stage developments of the building and purchased furniture and other items.
"I was absolutely shocked when I was told the developers did not intend to sell me the apartment. I did not realise something like this could happen. I was meeting my parents to buy carpets and when I told them they could not believe it either. "I received no warning and I was never told there was a waiting list of prospective purchasers," said Ms Murphy.
She gave a list to the contractors of proposed changes she wanted in her apartment and paid them £140 for additional plug points in the premises.
When she was told they were withdrawing from the sale and after she had issued legal proceedings against the developers, Ms Murphy received a further bill in October for £140 from Pierce Construction for additional work done to the apartment, which she also paid.
After legal argument on behalf of Pierce Construction, which had entered a full defence but did not go into evidence, Judge Patrick Moran said he had no difficulty in making an order in favour of Ms Murphy.
There was an oral agreement between the plaintiff and the auctioneer to purchase the apartment for £66,000. The judge said one of the most extraordinary things about the case was that after the defendants had indicated they were no longer proceeding with the sale to Ms Murphy, they sought payment of £140 for works done to the apartment.
He refused an application for leave to appeal but put a stay of one week on his order to allow the defence to appeal that decision to the High Court.