191 thoughts on “Property Misrepresentation Claims in Practice”
I purchased a property where the survey showed no issues with the roof. However moving in during Winter there was significant condensation stains on the ceiling. It now appears the roof was constructed incorrectly. On the TA6 the seller mentioned that the roof was replaced but stated no warranty was offered. Do I have any recompense if I believe the seller knew the roof was incorrectly built? Also found out a roofer who had done some minor repair work said that he mentioned the roof needed replacing. Does any of this count as mis-representation if me and my solicitor asked no questions?
Thank you for your comment and apologies for the delay in responding. We are unable to give specific advice in such circumstances as we have not seen any documentation relating to the property.
However, the starting point here is that it is not generally a misrepresentation for a seller to fail to disclose such matters as these. Rather, the seller is only required to give correct information where they volunteer it or answer questions about the property. Whether or not they are liable will depend on the contents of the Property Information Form and other communications you have had with the seller prior to exchange.
For these reasons, please get in touch with us for a confidential discussion should you wish further advice.
Hi, we purchased a property last year. The seller stated that we had an electricity meter. We found out that meter is 150 yards away from our property in a locked cupboard (not owned by us), it feeds multiple dwellings and UKPN can’t say it belongs to us, however Scottish Power opened a business account in our name saying we are liable for that meter. Can we do something against the seller because he has hidden such information ? Thanks
In terms of misrepresentation claims, sometimes what is said is factually inaccurate (for example, the property has an electricity meter that feeds it) but because of something fundamental that is left out (it feeds a number of dwellings) it is arguably misleading.
These are the sorts of claims which often become the most contentious, with the seller arguing that they had not said anything inaccurate and the buyer having to prove the seller knew of the circumstances and knew the buyer had been misled.
In short, there could be a claim against your seller based on the above principles but it would be important to think about what the value of that claim is (which of course is important in any case).
Further to our previous reply, we have been undertaking work for clients on their misrepresentation claims and came across a case which may be of some assistance in your matter. We are not certain of whether or not it does have application in your matter, however, but it may be worth a read.
In the case of Glossop Cartons and Print Ltd v Contact (Print and Packaging) Ltd [2019] the seller of a commercial unit was found to have made a misrepresentation when they failed to inform the buyer that the electricity supply came via other premises, and that the owner of those other premises had the right to turn the electricity supply off. However, this was a deliberate concealment, as opposed to a genuine mistake. Sometimes misrepresentation claims turn of very fact specific circumstances.
However, the case can readily be found on the internet and may be worth a read, as there could be some principles that apply to your matter and some comparisons of use.
When cases go to Court, historical cases and legal authorities are normally referred to in support of the legal principles which are being argued. Whilst a decided case may not be on all fours with your case, there can be important (and depending on the seniority of the Court – binding) principles that can be extrapolated and applied.”
Hello, I bought a converted property (single storey, 2-bed, 2-bath property with stone walls) nearly three years ago as a holiday home. The PIF specified that the property would benefit from solar panels – which was important to as it would reduce our bills when guests book the property. It also specified that there would be a car parking space, and that the conversion would come with insurance/warranty covering roof/windows/electrical works – very important as these are part of the work on the conversion. However, I’ve just been made aware that there are no solar panels (in fact the developer never had planning permission for solar panels), the car parking space had not been available for the last two years as they had allowed another developer to use the carpark. There had never been any insurance/warranty documents provided and I’ve reached out to the developer – as I have been advised re poor electrical work on the property – but he is not responding with any insurance documentation or about the solar panels and car parking space. Is this misrepresentation?
This sounds very unusual but yes, we suppose that if these were things that you were promised, and induced you to enter into the contract, then they would be misrepresentations.
However, we are not certain of a few points and would need to consider these in context with you. For example, it would not be unusual for a standard clause to be included in a contract for the sale of land that the buyer accepts the property in the condition it is in at the time of exchange of contracts. Solar panels are quite noticeable and their absence something we assume could have been spotted. Whilst the promise of them may have induced you into the contract, we are not certain the extent to which you would have an actionable claim, on the basis that a standard clause is probably contained in the contract which, in effect, affirms the contractual position. In short, you have contractually agreed to proceed absent the solar panels. However, there is case law which supports the contention that even if the “truth” of the position could have been discovered, if the contracting had taken the time to do so, a misrepresentation could still arise.
As for the parking space, either this was part of your land, or there should have been some sort of other agreement allowing you to use the parking space on someone else’s land. This is something that should probably have been picked up on at the conveyancing stage.
We think we would need to spend some time talking to you about exactly what had occurred before we could consider the matter in any detail.
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.
I purchased a property where the survey showed no issues with the roof. However moving in during Winter there was significant condensation stains on the ceiling. It now appears the roof was constructed incorrectly. On the TA6 the seller mentioned that the roof was replaced but stated no warranty was offered. Do I have any recompense if I believe the seller knew the roof was incorrectly built? Also found out a roofer who had done some minor repair work said that he mentioned the roof needed replacing. Does any of this count as mis-representation if me and my solicitor asked no questions?
Thank you for your comment and apologies for the delay in responding. We are unable to give specific advice in such circumstances as we have not seen any documentation relating to the property.
However, the starting point here is that it is not generally a misrepresentation for a seller to fail to disclose such matters as these. Rather, the seller is only required to give correct information where they volunteer it or answer questions about the property. Whether or not they are liable will depend on the contents of the Property Information Form and other communications you have had with the seller prior to exchange.
For these reasons, please get in touch with us for a confidential discussion should you wish further advice.
Hi, we purchased a property last year. The seller stated that we had an electricity meter. We found out that meter is 150 yards away from our property in a locked cupboard (not owned by us), it feeds multiple dwellings and UKPN can’t say it belongs to us, however Scottish Power opened a business account in our name saying we are liable for that meter.
Can we do something against the seller because he has hidden such information ?
Thanks
Thank you for your comment.
In terms of misrepresentation claims, sometimes what is said is factually inaccurate (for example, the property has an electricity meter that feeds it) but because of something fundamental that is left out (it feeds a number of dwellings) it is arguably misleading.
These are the sorts of claims which often become the most contentious, with the seller arguing that they had not said anything inaccurate and the buyer having to prove the seller knew of the circumstances and knew the buyer had been misled.
In short, there could be a claim against your seller based on the above principles but it would be important to think about what the value of that claim is (which of course is important in any case).
Further to our previous reply, we have been undertaking work for clients on their misrepresentation claims and came across a case which may be of some assistance in your matter. We are not certain of whether or not it does have application in your matter, however, but it may be worth a read.
In the case of Glossop Cartons and Print Ltd v Contact (Print and Packaging) Ltd [2019] the seller of a commercial unit was found to have made a misrepresentation when they failed to inform the buyer that the electricity supply came via other premises, and that the owner of those other premises had the right to turn the electricity supply off. However, this was a deliberate concealment, as opposed to a genuine mistake. Sometimes misrepresentation claims turn of very fact specific circumstances.
However, the case can readily be found on the internet and may be worth a read, as there could be some principles that apply to your matter and some comparisons of use.
When cases go to Court, historical cases and legal authorities are normally referred to in support of the legal principles which are being argued. Whilst a decided case may not be on all fours with your case, there can be important (and depending on the seniority of the Court – binding) principles that can be extrapolated and applied.”
Hello, I bought a converted property (single storey, 2-bed, 2-bath property with stone walls) nearly three years ago as a holiday home. The PIF specified that the property would benefit from solar panels – which was important to as it would reduce our bills when guests book the property. It also specified that there would be a car parking space, and that the conversion would come with insurance/warranty covering roof/windows/electrical works – very important as these are part of the work on the conversion. However, I’ve just been made aware that there are no solar panels (in fact the developer never had planning permission for solar panels), the car parking space had not been available for the last two years as they had allowed another developer to use the carpark. There had never been any insurance/warranty documents provided and I’ve reached out to the developer – as I have been advised re poor electrical work on the property – but he is not responding with any insurance documentation or about the solar panels and car parking space. Is this misrepresentation?
Thank you for your comment.
This sounds very unusual but yes, we suppose that if these were things that you were promised, and induced you to enter into the contract, then they would be misrepresentations.
However, we are not certain of a few points and would need to consider these in context with you. For example, it would not be unusual for a standard clause to be included in a contract for the sale of land that the buyer accepts the property in the condition it is in at the time of exchange of contracts. Solar panels are quite noticeable and their absence something we assume could have been spotted. Whilst the promise of them may have induced you into the contract, we are not certain the extent to which you would have an actionable claim, on the basis that a standard clause is probably contained in the contract which, in effect, affirms the contractual position. In short, you have contractually agreed to proceed absent the solar panels. However, there is case law which supports the contention that even if the “truth” of the position could have been discovered, if the contracting had taken the time to do so, a misrepresentation could still arise.
As for the parking space, either this was part of your land, or there should have been some sort of other agreement allowing you to use the parking space on someone else’s land. This is something that should probably have been picked up on at the conveyancing stage.
We think we would need to spend some time talking to you about exactly what had occurred before we could consider the matter in any detail.