416 thoughts on “My Seller Lied To Me! When Is It Property Misrepresentation?”
Hi, I was in the process of buying a house recently and decided to pull out after mortgage valuation uncovered that the house has structural issues and there are movements meaning the property is not stable. A structural engineer is required to undertake a thorough inspection before mortgage offer is accepted.
When I shared the valuation outcome with the estate agent instead of resolving the issue they increased the property value to proposed market value (suggested by the lender ONLY after significant work is done to ensure stability of the property) and advertised it within few hours since I made them aware of the valuation results and have pulled out. It maybe that they miraculously managed to get an engineer to come and inspect within the few hours which is highly unlikely. Is it legal to advertise falsely in the UK and hide the survey outcome? If the issues not picked up again let’s say by poor valuation and the building collapses potentially leading to serious consequences i.e. loss of lives who will be liable? Since the estate agent and the seller are both allowed to get away with hiding serious structural issues and not penalised in anyway.
We are not able to offer any advice or guidance on criminal law. However, from a contractual point of view, there is no obligation on a seller to provide specific information to a buyer. It is for the buyer to make the necessary enquiries, of the seller or through searches or surveys, until such time that they are satisfied and prepared to commit to a transaction.
Hi. An interesting site, thanks. I moved into an apartment 18 months ago and it’s very near to a multi-storey car park. There’s regularly anti social behaviour, skate boards for hours at a time, music, loud shouting till midnight sometimes which is really loud. I’ve done some digging and the previous owners have been in the local press complaining and stating they’ve had issues for the last 8 years on similar lines! This was never declared. Do I have a case? Thanks
Thank you for your comment. There may be two potential claims here.
You may have a claim for public and/or private nuisance against the car park owners. Much will depend on the nature of the antisocial behaviour and what steps could reasonably be expected to be taken by the owner to prevent a nuisance arising as to whether or not it can be legally said that the car park owner has a duty to prevent the behaviour claimed of from arising.
As for a claim against your sellers, there appears to be a common misconception that a seller is under some sort of duty or obligation to provide information about the property that they are selling. There is no obligation on any seller to disclose anything about a property. It is up to the buyer to satisfy themselves that they are prepared to purchase the property and to do this, they will normally make formal searches, ask questions about the property and have a survey undertaken. Whilst a seller has no duty to a buyer to provide information about the property or answer any questions, the practical aspect of this is that if a seller does not answer questions when asked, then the chances are a buyer would not proceed.
Therefore, in answer to your question, the seller was under no obligation to declare anything regarding the antisocial behaviour. However, there is a need to ensure that when a seller does provide information about a property to a prospective buyer, accurate information is provided. The position is different if the seller provided inaccurate information about the property.
If information provided was relied upon by you when deciding to purchase the property and it was factually inaccurate, then there may be a claim for misrepresentation. For example, if the seller had stated during the transaction, either directly or via their solicitors, that they had no trouble at all from the car park, then this could be a misrepresentation as they have had 8 years’ worth of trouble. These representations, or answers given about the property, will normally be contained in a property information form or in writing between the buyer and seller’s solicitors. For example, there are questions in the standard property information form regarding disputes and complaints about the property. It may be that the answers given by the seller in the property information form are inaccurate, if there have been disputes and complaints historically but the seller has ticked “no” in answer to the question regarding whether or not they were aware of any disputes.
We have produced a blog citing some examples of real-life cases of property misrepresentation here (https://cunningtons.co.uk/property-misrepresentation-claims/). McMeekin v Long [2003], is mentioned as an example of a case where the seller stated that there were no ongoing disputes with neighbours but that transpired to be untrue.
Do feel free to get in touch if you would like to explore the matter further.
Our property has a history of subsidence which was underpinned by a previous owner in 1985. As it is now 35 years + since any subsidence was underpinned, are we still liable to inform a buyer of this history, especially when there has been no subsidence in the 14 years we have owned the property ? Our sellers form did not ask if there has been any history of subsidence either. Our home insurance premiums are as per any normal home as we were advised the subsidence was more than 25 years ago.
While we cannot advise on specific matters without having properly considered all the documentation in this case, whether you must disclose something depends upon what is asked of you. There are generally only very limited duties to disclose defects. However while the property information form is important, it is not the be all and end all. If the buyer specifically asks you about something, and you give a false reply to it, and they could reasonably be expected to rely upon that statement, it is just as much a misrepresentation as if you had given a false statement on the property information form.
This is something that you may want to discuss with us in more detail so we can advise you having properly considered all the documentation in the case, especially if the buyer is alleging that you have misrepresented yourself. Feel free to contact us for a discussion in complete confidence.
Apologies it was the property information form that didn’t question anything specifically to subsidence. The buyer has not asked any direct question either in relation to subsidence. I agree, if we should be asked directly by either the buyer or surveyor on this matter it is only right to be honestly open. We do have paperwork relating to all correspondence and underpinning work etc. as well as a structural survey undertaken (which had the all clear) at the time we purchased the property.
My question really is, after 35 years surely it wouldn’t be necessary to have to declare any history of subsidence or does this saga never end ?
Thank you for this. We cannot give specific advice over the web without having seen the documentation. However from what you have said whether you do need to disclose it depends upon what effect it is having on the property and whether it is still an issue that is having an actual effect upon the property. Normally the property information form will include a question relating to structural issues. Whether this means you should disclose it depends on how exactly it is worded.
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, I was in the process of buying a house recently and decided to pull out after mortgage valuation uncovered that the house has structural issues and there are movements meaning the property is not stable. A structural engineer is required to undertake a thorough inspection before mortgage offer is accepted.
When I shared the valuation outcome with the estate agent instead of resolving the issue they increased the property value to proposed market value (suggested by the lender ONLY after significant work is done to ensure stability of the property) and advertised it within few hours since I made them aware of the valuation results and have pulled out. It maybe that they miraculously managed to get an engineer to come and inspect within the few hours which is highly unlikely. Is it legal to advertise falsely in the UK and hide the survey outcome? If the issues not picked up again let’s say by poor valuation and the building collapses potentially leading to serious consequences i.e. loss of lives who will be liable? Since the estate agent and the seller are both allowed to get away with hiding serious structural issues and not penalised in anyway.
Thank you for your comment.
We are not able to offer any advice or guidance on criminal law. However, from a contractual point of view, there is no obligation on a seller to provide specific information to a buyer. It is for the buyer to make the necessary enquiries, of the seller or through searches or surveys, until such time that they are satisfied and prepared to commit to a transaction.
Hi. An interesting site, thanks. I moved into an apartment 18 months ago and it’s very near to a multi-storey car park. There’s regularly anti social behaviour, skate boards for hours at a time, music, loud shouting till midnight sometimes which is really loud. I’ve done some digging and the previous owners have been in the local press complaining and stating they’ve had issues for the last 8 years on similar lines! This was never declared. Do I have a case? Thanks
Thank you for your comment. There may be two potential claims here.
You may have a claim for public and/or private nuisance against the car park owners. Much will depend on the nature of the antisocial behaviour and what steps could reasonably be expected to be taken by the owner to prevent a nuisance arising as to whether or not it can be legally said that the car park owner has a duty to prevent the behaviour claimed of from arising.
As for a claim against your sellers, there appears to be a common misconception that a seller is under some sort of duty or obligation to provide information about the property that they are selling. There is no obligation on any seller to disclose anything about a property. It is up to the buyer to satisfy themselves that they are prepared to purchase the property and to do this, they will normally make formal searches, ask questions about the property and have a survey undertaken. Whilst a seller has no duty to a buyer to provide information about the property or answer any questions, the practical aspect of this is that if a seller does not answer questions when asked, then the chances are a buyer would not proceed.
Therefore, in answer to your question, the seller was under no obligation to declare anything regarding the antisocial behaviour. However, there is a need to ensure that when a seller does provide information about a property to a prospective buyer, accurate information is provided. The position is different if the seller provided inaccurate information about the property.
If information provided was relied upon by you when deciding to purchase the property and it was factually inaccurate, then there may be a claim for misrepresentation. For example, if the seller had stated during the transaction, either directly or via their solicitors, that they had no trouble at all from the car park, then this could be a misrepresentation as they have had 8 years’ worth of trouble. These representations, or answers given about the property, will normally be contained in a property information form or in writing between the buyer and seller’s solicitors. For example, there are questions in the standard property information form regarding disputes and complaints about the property. It may be that the answers given by the seller in the property information form are inaccurate, if there have been disputes and complaints historically but the seller has ticked “no” in answer to the question regarding whether or not they were aware of any disputes.
We have produced a blog citing some examples of real-life cases of property misrepresentation here (https://cunningtons.co.uk/property-misrepresentation-claims/). McMeekin v Long [2003], is mentioned as an example of a case where the seller stated that there were no ongoing disputes with neighbours but that transpired to be untrue.
Do feel free to get in touch if you would like to explore the matter further.
Our property has a history of subsidence which was underpinned by a previous owner in 1985. As it is now 35 years + since any subsidence was underpinned, are we still liable to inform a buyer of this history, especially when there has been no subsidence in the 14 years we have owned the property ? Our sellers form did not ask if there has been any history of subsidence either.
Our home insurance premiums are as per any normal home as we were advised the subsidence was more than 25 years ago.
While we cannot advise on specific matters without having properly considered all the documentation in this case, whether you must disclose something depends upon what is asked of you. There are generally only very limited duties to disclose defects. However while the property information form is important, it is not the be all and end all. If the buyer specifically asks you about something, and you give a false reply to it, and they could reasonably be expected to rely upon that statement, it is just as much a misrepresentation as if you had given a false statement on the property information form.
This is something that you may want to discuss with us in more detail so we can advise you having properly considered all the documentation in the case, especially if the buyer is alleging that you have misrepresented yourself. Feel free to contact us for a discussion in complete confidence.
Apologies it was the property information form that didn’t question anything specifically to subsidence. The buyer has not asked any direct question either in relation to subsidence.
I agree, if we should be asked directly by either the buyer or surveyor on this matter it is only right to be honestly open. We do have paperwork relating to all correspondence and underpinning work etc. as well as a structural survey undertaken (which had the all clear) at the time we purchased the property.
My question really is, after 35 years surely it wouldn’t be necessary to have to declare any history of subsidence or does this saga never end ?
Thank you for this. We cannot give specific advice over the web without having seen the documentation. However from what you have said whether you do need to disclose it depends upon what effect it is having on the property and whether it is still an issue that is having an actual effect upon the property. Normally the property information form will include a question relating to structural issues. Whether this means you should disclose it depends on how exactly it is worded.