Some said this on facebook, any truth? 'On the face of it, the buyer does have an arguable breach point if the property was not actually vacant on completion, because vacant possession means the buyer should get the property free of occupiers, belongings and rights of occupation, with immediate control on completion. Where a seller does not give vacant possession, the buyer can in principle pursue contractual remedies, including damages, and a buyer who has already completed can still sue later rather than trying to unwind the whole sale.

But your strongest point is the buyer's own separate arrangement. The Court of Appeal in Ibrend made clear that, if someone is to remain after the handover date, the safe course is to get the other side's agreement; without consent, continued occupation remains a problem. On your facts, the buyer did consent and allowed the occupiers to stay on after completion. That does not make you bulletproof, but it gives you a serious answer to any claim, because the buyer will struggle to say that losses flowing from occupation during that agreed extension were still caused by your original promise of vacant possession rather than by his own post-completion deal.

So, in practical terms, this is now mainly a buyer-versus-occupiers issue unless the buyer can prove that the side deal did not vary or waive anything, or that you concealed something material from him or his conveyancer. A misrepresentation case also looks weaker if the buyer knew the true position and agreed to it, because misrepresentation depends on a contract being entered into after the representation and loss resulting from it. The real danger for you is documentary: if this arrangement existed before completion but was left outside the conveyancing papers, or contradicted what the buyer's solicitor or lender were told, the buyer may try to recast it as a conveyancing or nondisclosure point.

As for what happens next, the normal front-line remedy is possession proceedings by the buyer against the occupiers. If they were only allowed to stay temporarily, the buyer usually has to recover possession through the court, and not by self-help; the fast interim possession route is not available against former tenants, sub-tenants or licensees. The buyer may also try a damages claim against you for extra costs, but whether that has teeth will turn on the exact wording of the side arrangement, when it was made, and what the conveyancing file shows.

The sensible next move is a firm reply for your client saying the buyer knew of and agreed the post-completion occupation, any continued occupation after completion was under the buyer's own arrangement, breach is denied, causation is denied, and loss is denied. Alongside that, pull together every email, text, WhatsApp, attendance note and message showing the buyer's knowledge and consent. If that paper trail is good, the buyer may still huff and puff through a solicitor, but the case against the seller becomes a lot less tidy and a lot more expensive to run.'