416 thoughts on “My Seller Lied To Me! When Is It Property Misrepresentation?”
I entered an auction contract under a negligent/fraudulent statement. I have paid a 10% deposit. The auctioneer did not disclose that the property is a unconventional construction. It is now reported that the property is constructed unconventionally (Hawksley P.R.C). Please let me know whether it is possible to claim mispresentation in this case.
It would not ordinarily be down to a seller to provide any information about a property, including whether or not it is of an unconventional construction. It would normally be for a buyer to take steps to satisfy themselves before bidding and/or accept the risk in proceeding in the absence of such information.
For a misrepresentation case to exist the seller must have actively mislead the buyer. It would be a very rare case that this would occur where there has been no specific representation made. In this matter, the representation would need to be to suggest expressly, or be sufficiently misleading that that the implication, was that the property was of a standard construction. In the absence of this, there is unlikely to be a claim for misrepresentation.
If you would like us to look into the position in more detail for you, please feel free to get in touch.
My partner and I recently bought a house with a rear extension which had been built without planning or building control over a decade ago. This was declared and indemnity insurance had been bought by the seller. What wasn’t picked up by the surveyor or us was that the extension had started to subside. The seller had covered small cracks with filler and repainted. Was is this fraudulent and could we make a claim.
There is no obligation on a seller to provide any information about a property. It is down to a buyer’s surveyor to identify structural problems.
However, if the seller was aware of the subsidence but expressly suggested that this was not occurring, then this would likely be a misrepresentation. It would be necessary to identify a false statement of fact relating to the point before a claim for misrepresentation would arise. Normally, representations are made in writing during the course of the transaction and in response to enquiries made by the seller.
It is more likely that you have a professional negligence claim against your surveyor. However, this would depend on the scope of their instructions. This is what they said they were going to do and the limitations on this contained in their terms and conditions.
You should certainly contact your buildings insurer about the position. However, if you would like to explore the position in more detail, do get in touch.
Had an offer accepted on a property and it is going through now with the vendors. Just waiting on the home buyers to be done in a couple of weeks via Natwest. Standard valuation was fine.
A large well known estate agency has the floor plan as 265.7 sq m. I checked the epc and it is down as 177 sq metres. Having liaised with the helpful gentleman who did the epc, he said whilst he has a margin of error of 15%, the house is definitely not that size and it is wrong by a fair bit.
How does this stand? Of course the estate agents were pushy and talking about how much house there is for the money ….this is actually on their house advert too. But of course now it is significantly less
Thank you for this comment, and please accept our apologies for the delay in responding.
The question here is that while the statement was that the property’s floor area was 265.7 square metres does appear to be false, can you rely upon it, and also was it a merely innocent or negligent misrepresentation as opposed to an intentional, fraudulent, or reckless one. This is because often there are non-reliance clauses in the contract which the parties agree to exclude liability for innocent or negligent misrepresentations, as well as declare that they have only relied on things that are explicitly stated in the contract. However if the contract can be argued to incorporate the documentation from the estate agent then that may be sufficient to get around this, and if we can show that the seller and/or their agent deliberately entered into a course of conduct to paint a false picture, then this may be actionable as well.
If you wish to discuss this with us in more detail, please feel free to contact our Litigation team at the Braintree office.
Hi, we recently bought a property where on the TA6 form the seller declared that the boiler was installed in 2015 and then serviced in 2019 but she had no paperwork to support either statement. We have been living there 6-7 weeks and the boiler has now failed and left us without heating. On inspection from a heating engineer, significant damage was found to the inside of a boiler and they believe that there “is no way it was last serviced in 2019” due to the extent of the rust and damage present. They also stated that the boiler is from 2011 (due to the serial numbers present). Their view is that the boiler will need a complete replacement, which will leave us severely out of pocket. Given this it seems very unlikely that the info provided by the seller on the TA6 form was true (especially with no paperwork to back it up) – do we have a case to claim against/sue the seller for providing misleading info to us when we bought the house, as we relied on the form to provide us with accurate information?
A misrepresentation occurs when a factually inaccurate statement is made which induces the other party into a contract causing a loss. From what you have stated, it does appear that the information provided in the property information form was factually inaccurate. There is likely scope to argue that you relied on statement that the service in 2019 left the boiler in reasonable working order and that it was 4 years newer than it actually is.
Having said this, there is a risk that perhaps the sellers did make factually accurate statements, insofar as perhaps the serial number is old, but it was installed when stated. Likewise, they may have had a service undertaken by the person undertaking the service was negligent in not spotting that damage your recent engineer has identified.
We would tentatively suggest that there may be a claim here but much will turn on proving that the statements made which induced you into the contract were inaccurate. For this, an expert’s report saying why it is impossible for the boiler to have been serviced would be required.
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 entered an auction contract under a negligent/fraudulent statement. I have paid a 10% deposit.
The auctioneer did not disclose that the property is a unconventional construction.
It is now reported that the property is constructed unconventionally (Hawksley P.R.C).
Please let me know whether it is possible to claim mispresentation in this case.
Thank you for your comment.
It would not ordinarily be down to a seller to provide any information about a property, including whether or not it is of an unconventional construction. It would normally be for a buyer to take steps to satisfy themselves before bidding and/or accept the risk in proceeding in the absence of such information.
For a misrepresentation case to exist the seller must have actively mislead the buyer. It would be a very rare case that this would occur where there has been no specific representation made. In this matter, the representation would need to be to suggest expressly, or be sufficiently misleading that that the implication, was that the property was of a standard construction. In the absence of this, there is unlikely to be a claim for misrepresentation.
If you would like us to look into the position in more detail for you, please feel free to get in touch.
My partner and I recently bought a house with a rear extension which had been built without planning or building control over a decade ago. This was declared and indemnity insurance had been bought by the seller. What wasn’t picked up by the surveyor or us was that the extension had started to subside. The seller had covered small cracks with filler and repainted. Was is this fraudulent and could we make a claim.
There is no obligation on a seller to provide any information about a property. It is down to a buyer’s surveyor to identify structural problems.
However, if the seller was aware of the subsidence but expressly suggested that this was not occurring, then this would likely be a misrepresentation. It would be necessary to identify a false statement of fact relating to the point before a claim for misrepresentation would arise. Normally, representations are made in writing during the course of the transaction and in response to enquiries made by the seller.
It is more likely that you have a professional negligence claim against your surveyor. However, this would depend on the scope of their instructions. This is what they said they were going to do and the limitations on this contained in their terms and conditions.
You should certainly contact your buildings insurer about the position. However, if you would like to explore the position in more detail, do get in touch.
Had an offer accepted on a property and it is going through now with the vendors. Just waiting on the home buyers to be done in a couple of weeks via Natwest. Standard valuation was fine.
A large well known estate agency has the floor plan as 265.7 sq m. I checked the epc and it is down as 177 sq metres. Having liaised with the helpful gentleman who did the epc, he said whilst he has a margin of error of 15%, the house is definitely not that size and it is wrong by a fair bit.
How does this stand? Of course the estate agents were pushy and talking about how much house there is for the money ….this is actually on their house advert too. But of course now it is significantly less
Thank you for this comment, and please accept our apologies for the delay in responding.
The question here is that while the statement was that the property’s floor area was 265.7 square metres does appear to be false, can you rely upon it, and also was it a merely innocent or negligent misrepresentation as opposed to an intentional, fraudulent, or reckless one. This is because often there are non-reliance clauses in the contract which the parties agree to exclude liability for innocent or negligent misrepresentations, as well as declare that they have only relied on things that are explicitly stated in the contract. However if the contract can be argued to incorporate the documentation from the estate agent then that may be sufficient to get around this, and if we can show that the seller and/or their agent deliberately entered into a course of conduct to paint a false picture, then this may be actionable as well.
If you wish to discuss this with us in more detail, please feel free to contact our Litigation team at the Braintree office.
Hi, we recently bought a property where on the TA6 form the seller declared that the boiler was installed in 2015 and then serviced in 2019 but she had no paperwork to support either statement.
We have been living there 6-7 weeks and the boiler has now failed and left us without heating. On inspection from a heating engineer, significant damage was found to the inside of a boiler and they believe that there “is no way it was last serviced in 2019” due to the extent of the rust and damage present. They also stated that the boiler is from 2011 (due to the serial numbers present).
Their view is that the boiler will need a complete replacement, which will leave us severely out of pocket.
Given this it seems very unlikely that the info provided by the seller on the TA6 form was true (especially with no paperwork to back it up) – do we have a case to claim against/sue the seller for providing misleading info to us when we bought the house, as we relied on the form to provide us with accurate information?
Thank you for your comment.
A misrepresentation occurs when a factually inaccurate statement is made which induces the other party into a contract causing a loss. From what you have stated, it does appear that the information provided in the property information form was factually inaccurate. There is likely scope to argue that you relied on statement that the service in 2019 left the boiler in reasonable working order and that it was 4 years newer than it actually is.
Having said this, there is a risk that perhaps the sellers did make factually accurate statements, insofar as perhaps the serial number is old, but it was installed when stated. Likewise, they may have had a service undertaken by the person undertaking the service was negligent in not spotting that damage your recent engineer has identified.
We would tentatively suggest that there may be a claim here but much will turn on proving that the statements made which induced you into the contract were inaccurate. For this, an expert’s report saying why it is impossible for the boiler to have been serviced would be required.
Thank you