191 thoughts on “Property Misrepresentation Claims in Practice”
Hi,
We are selling an apartment. The buyer has a pet and any pets needs consent by the terms of lease. We acquired a consent through a vote and handed this to the buyer. Now we we are weeks away from exchange and one of the shareholders is upset about the vote and contest allowing the pet. We have checked with a legal team that the vote stands and it does. The man against the pet is now claiming a dispute and that no consent was given. He is obviously using the word dispute knowing the impact of the word. My question is if we need to disclose this man’s antics to the buyers? He is obviously trying to sabotage our sale and I we need to disclose he can actually do so. Is this really right as we seem to have no protection even though we have followed all rules.
We cannot provide advice which is specific on our website. There is too much risk that it may be considered a substitution for formal and fully considered legal advice.
What we can say is that this is certainly an issue you should discuss with your existing solicitor. For example, if the Law Society Conveyancing Protocol has been adopted for the transaction, then your buyer may have an expectation that any replies to enquiries given would be updated if there are no longer accurate. The TA6 (Property Information Form) specifically envisages a situation and contains guidance notes which state that where the seller later becomes aware of any information which would alter the previous replies given the seller should contact their solicitor. The form itself says that this is as important as giving accurate answers in the first place. There is also existing case law which does indicate that a misrepresentation can arise if updated information is not supplied.
Subject entirely to what your current solicitor may say, as they have a far better idea of the issues and matter generally, it may be the case that you want to consider explaining the situation to the buyer, perhaps also providing details of the legal advice given to you regarding the consent previously given and how it is binding.
Hi I have just recently moved into my new home to find out I have the neighbours from hell. The previous owners only lived there two years so this was obviously the reason why they moved. I specifically asked them about the neighbours and they said they were fine and no disputes were mentioned on any correspondence. I believe they have dishonestly covered this up and sold me a property I would not have purchased had I know these facts. Do I have a case for misrepresentation?
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately we cannot give specific advice in respect of this via this comment thread, however, misrepresentation as to disputes with neighbours is something that not infrequently arises and which can form the basis of a claim.
The position is that for there to be a claim in misrepresentation, the sellers must have actively given a false statement to you which you relied upon, and were entitled to rely upon, and which led you to buy the property and as a result of which you have lost out. However normally in property transactions there are clauses in the contract which at the very least exclude all reliance on representations not made in writing, so when you say you specifically asked the sellers about the neighbours, was this by way of a Property Information Form or other such written communication or merely verbally. If they were asked in writing about problems with the neighbours and denied that there were any, and in fact the opposite was true, then this would potentially give rise to a claim. You would also have to show both that there had been nuisance from the neighbour during your occupancy of the property and during the occupancy of the seller.
Hello I recently bought a property where the seller said they were not aware of any infestations. The loft, it turns out is a bat roost. We thought it was mice (as our survey said evidence of vermin and surveyor verbally indicated this) but it turns out that when we asked pest control they believe it is bats. Is there any point in going back to the sellers or surveyor on this? I would have thought the surveyor should have known the difference and as the evidence is significant in the loft space probably the seller also knew and did not disclose.
I think it is doubtful there would be a basis of claim.
For any sort of misrepresentation claim to be successful, it is necessary for the aggrieved party to have “relied” on the representation made.
We cannot give specific advice on our website, as we are not aware of all of the relevant facts. However, there could be an issue with such a claim because, whilst perhaps the sellers were aware of the issues, the reality is that your surveyor identified this. You accepted that there was a vermin issue and proceeded, and cannot really say that the seller caused you to proceed because they confirmed that there was no such issue.
Whether there is a claim against the surveyor will depend on the terms that you agreed and what the surveyor said they were going to check for you. There may be an issue in terms of removing the bats if, for example, they are protected by law. In that case, it might be worthwhile raising the point with the surveyor.
Supporting Farleigh Hospice | Limited Places Available We’re delighted to announce that Cunningtons is once again partnering with Farleigh Hospice for the annual Make a Will charity campaign this September! What We’re Offering ✅ Completely FREE Will preparation by our qualified solicitors;✅ Professional legal advice and guidance on making your Will; and of course,✅ Support […]
Planning for the future as we get older is a vital part of life – that’s why many of us provide for ourselves with pensions and Wills. However, one of the most important tools available to us is often neglected: Lasting Powers of Attorney. According to CanadaLife UK, 78% of UK adults don’t have a […]
Cunningtons help with "Your Legal Journey Through Life". We cover key areas: your first home, your relationships and family law, then growing families, employment matters, dispute resolutions, property investments, and planning your estate. We focus on continuity, trust, understanding clients, and personal service by offering the same legal team throughout life.
Hi,
We are selling an apartment. The buyer has a pet and any pets needs consent by the terms of lease. We acquired a consent through a vote and handed this to the buyer. Now we we are weeks away from exchange and one of the shareholders is upset about the vote and contest allowing the pet. We have checked with a legal team that the vote stands and it does. The man against the pet is now claiming a dispute and that no consent was given. He is obviously using the word dispute knowing the impact of the word. My question is if we need to disclose this man’s antics to the buyers? He is obviously trying to sabotage our sale and I we need to disclose he can actually do so. Is this really right as we seem to have no protection even though we have followed all rules.
Thank you for your comment.
We cannot provide advice which is specific on our website. There is too much risk that it may be considered a substitution for formal and fully considered legal advice.
What we can say is that this is certainly an issue you should discuss with your existing solicitor. For example, if the Law Society Conveyancing Protocol has been adopted for the transaction, then your buyer may have an expectation that any replies to enquiries given would be updated if there are no longer accurate. The TA6 (Property Information Form) specifically envisages a situation and contains guidance notes which state that where the seller later becomes aware of any information which would alter the previous replies given the seller should contact their solicitor. The form itself says that this is as important as giving accurate answers in the first place. There is also existing case law which does indicate that a misrepresentation can arise if updated information is not supplied.
Subject entirely to what your current solicitor may say, as they have a far better idea of the issues and matter generally, it may be the case that you want to consider explaining the situation to the buyer, perhaps also providing details of the legal advice given to you regarding the consent previously given and how it is binding.
Hi
I have just recently moved into my new home to find out I have the neighbours from hell. The previous owners only lived there two years so this was obviously the reason why they moved. I specifically asked them about the neighbours and they said they were fine and no disputes were mentioned on any correspondence. I believe they have dishonestly covered this up and sold me a property I would not have purchased had I know these facts. Do I have a case for misrepresentation?
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately we cannot give specific advice in respect of this via this comment thread, however, misrepresentation as to disputes with neighbours is something that not infrequently arises and which can form the basis of a claim.
The position is that for there to be a claim in misrepresentation, the sellers must have actively given a false statement to you which you relied upon, and were entitled to rely upon, and which led you to buy the property and as a result of which you have lost out. However normally in property transactions there are clauses in the contract which at the very least exclude all reliance on representations not made in writing, so when you say you specifically asked the sellers about the neighbours, was this by way of a Property Information Form or other such written communication or merely verbally. If they were asked in writing about problems with the neighbours and denied that there were any, and in fact the opposite was true, then this would potentially give rise to a claim. You would also have to show both that there had been nuisance from the neighbour during your occupancy of the property and during the occupancy of the seller.
Please feel free to telephone our Litigation department at the Braintree office for a confidential discussion.
Hello I recently bought a property where the seller said they were not aware of any infestations. The loft, it turns out is a bat roost. We thought it was mice (as our survey said evidence of vermin and surveyor verbally indicated this) but it turns out that when we asked pest control they believe it is bats. Is there any point in going back to the sellers or surveyor on this? I would have thought the surveyor should have known the difference and as the evidence is significant in the loft space probably the seller also knew and did not disclose.
Thank you for your comment.
I think it is doubtful there would be a basis of claim.
For any sort of misrepresentation claim to be successful, it is necessary for the aggrieved party to have “relied” on the representation made.
We cannot give specific advice on our website, as we are not aware of all of the relevant facts. However, there could be an issue with such a claim because, whilst perhaps the sellers were aware of the issues, the reality is that your surveyor identified this. You accepted that there was a vermin issue and proceeded, and cannot really say that the seller caused you to proceed because they confirmed that there was no such issue.
Whether there is a claim against the surveyor will depend on the terms that you agreed and what the surveyor said they were going to check for you. There may be an issue in terms of removing the bats if, for example, they are protected by law. In that case, it might be worthwhile raising the point with the surveyor.