416 thoughts on “My Seller Lied To Me! When Is It Property Misrepresentation?”
Hi Mark, I am hoping you can help/offer any advise. We purchased a leasehold flat with a garden attached (owned by us). It is a ground floor apartment and part of the garden included a side entrance (we were told by the estate agent that this was ours and we could do what we wanted with the height of the gate). On the same day as we completed we arrived at the property to builders in our back garden taking down our fence and putting it back together closer to our property, therefore reducing the size of our overall garden space. When we finally spoke to our freeholder that day (the first time we ever spoke to them, as it was all done through solicitors) we were informed that this section of garden actually belonged to the neighbouring freeholder, but this freeholder had ‘verbally’ given it to our freeholder and has now ‘decided to take it back’. To add to this complex situation, we were never provided with ground plans by the buyers solicitor and therefore never saw that the area of land in question was drawn on the plans as ‘communal’. Our land registry plan does not give any clarity and we are unsure what we are to do next/who to turn to. Many thanks
This does sound as though there may have been failures here on the part of those acting for you. It would normally be the case that plans are sent to a solicitor’s client for them to check, either themselves or via their surveyor. The lease itself would normally also include a plan.
If no plans were supplied, your solicitor should have told you this and highlighted the risk.
In respect of the seller, in the standard property information form (the TA6) there is a question about informal agreements with neighbours and about boundaries having been moved. Even if the seller was unaware of this issue, if they expressly confirmed that there had been no such agreement or movement of the boundary, there may be an innocent misrepresentation. This is still an actionable misrepresentation.
We would need to understand the situation in a lot more detail and if you would like to consider the matter further, please do feel free to get in touch.
Note: This is general guidance only and should not be relied on as a substitution for properly considered legal advice.
Hello, we completed on our house 2 weeks ago and noticed the downstairs toilet was blocked. After several attempts, we called the water company who cleared the blockage. They returned next day to do a drain survey and told us we must not use the toilet as it is flowing into a rainwater pipe that discharges into a brook. Apparently, the toilet is an addition to the property but was not declared on the sales information form. The downstairs toilet was crucial to our purchase as my husband has mobility issues. To connect the toilet to the mains would involve serious disruption and expense, what can we do?
It isn’t clear whether or not this is an issue which should have been identified by a water and drainage search, your surveyor or the seller. There could be a basis of claim against these parties but much would turn on the nature of the issue and whether or not it was discoverable. If the toilet was an addition to the property, requiring planning or building control authorisation or approval, then perhaps this is a point which your solicitor should have identified.
From a misrepresentation point of view, you would need to show that the seller actively mislead you. This does not have to be deliberate but there would normally need to be some comment or statement of fact made about the toilet. A claim would not exist if there was a mere assumption that everything was in working order without some sort of statement by the seller, express or implied.
This isn’t really something that we can offer any real guidance on here. We would need to review the transactional documentation with a view to identifying whether or not this was an issue which could have been identified and if so, who is at fault. Whether or not there are any statements made by the seller, for example, in the property information form, which could amount to a representation would also need to be considered.
Do feel free to get in touch if you would like to consider the matter in more detail.
Note: This is general guidance only and should not be relied on as a substitution for properly considered legal advice.
I have recently purchased a house and it appears that one of two chimney breasts has been removed from the ground floor and the First floor. I requested clarification on any works and the seller has suggested that she has not done any work and has lived at the property since 1989,
She also failed to mention that she had done work that was subject to building regulations and parity wall documentation of which no documentation exists. On arrival, I have noticed that the upper chimney is not properly supported and it is clear from the materials that are used that this was done far more recently than in 1989 and the brickwork for the chimney is coming apart in the loft.
Thank you for your comment. Matters relating to the structure of any property are normally the remit of a purchaser’s surveyor.
However, if the seller has made a factual statement that no work has been undertaken and there is evidence that this was not accurate, then if you relied on that confirmation when entering into the contract to purchase the property, you may have a claim for misrepresentation.
If your aim is to recover the cost of any remedial works necessary, then this may not be possible, however. Whilst there is some legal authority that the cost of rectification can be claimed, the normal measure of damages that a court would award is based on diminution in value.
Diminution in value is broadly the difference between what was paid for the property and what it was worth with the defect. This may not be the same as the cost of fixing the problem.
Note: This is general guidance only and should not be relied on as a substitution for properly considered legal advice.
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 Mark,
I am hoping you can help/offer any advise. We purchased a leasehold flat with a garden attached (owned by us). It is a ground floor apartment and part of the garden included a side entrance (we were told by the estate agent that this was ours and we could do what we wanted with the height of the gate). On the same day as we completed we arrived at the property to builders in our back garden taking down our fence and putting it back together closer to our property, therefore reducing the size of our overall garden space. When we finally spoke to our freeholder that day (the first time we ever spoke to them, as it was all done through solicitors) we were informed that this section of garden actually belonged to the neighbouring freeholder, but this freeholder had ‘verbally’ given it to our freeholder and has now ‘decided to take it back’. To add to this complex situation, we were never provided with ground plans by the buyers solicitor and therefore never saw that the area of land in question was drawn on the plans as ‘communal’. Our land registry plan does not give any clarity and we are unsure what we are to do next/who to turn to.
Many thanks
Thank you for your comment.
This does sound as though there may have been failures here on the part of those acting for you. It would normally be the case that plans are sent to a solicitor’s client for them to check, either themselves or via their surveyor. The lease itself would normally also include a plan.
If no plans were supplied, your solicitor should have told you this and highlighted the risk.
In respect of the seller, in the standard property information form (the TA6) there is a question about informal agreements with neighbours and about boundaries having been moved. Even if the seller was unaware of this issue, if they expressly confirmed that there had been no such agreement or movement of the boundary, there may be an innocent misrepresentation. This is still an actionable misrepresentation.
We would need to understand the situation in a lot more detail and if you would like to consider the matter further, please do feel free to get in touch.
Note: This is general guidance only and should not be relied on as a substitution for properly considered legal advice.
Hello, we completed on our house 2 weeks ago and noticed the downstairs toilet was blocked. After several attempts, we called the water company who cleared the blockage. They returned next day to do a drain survey and told us we must not use the toilet as it is flowing into a rainwater pipe that discharges into a brook. Apparently, the toilet is an addition to the property but was not declared on the sales information form. The downstairs toilet was crucial to our purchase as my husband has mobility issues. To connect the toilet to the mains would involve serious disruption and expense, what can we do?
Thank you for your comment.
It isn’t clear whether or not this is an issue which should have been identified by a water and drainage search, your surveyor or the seller. There could be a basis of claim against these parties but much would turn on the nature of the issue and whether or not it was discoverable. If the toilet was an addition to the property, requiring planning or building control authorisation or approval, then perhaps this is a point which your solicitor should have identified.
From a misrepresentation point of view, you would need to show that the seller actively mislead you. This does not have to be deliberate but there would normally need to be some comment or statement of fact made about the toilet. A claim would not exist if there was a mere assumption that everything was in working order without some sort of statement by the seller, express or implied.
This isn’t really something that we can offer any real guidance on here. We would need to review the transactional documentation with a view to identifying whether or not this was an issue which could have been identified and if so, who is at fault. Whether or not there are any statements made by the seller, for example, in the property information form, which could amount to a representation would also need to be considered.
Do feel free to get in touch if you would like to consider the matter in more detail.
Note: This is general guidance only and should not be relied on as a substitution for properly considered legal advice.
I have recently purchased a house and it appears that one of two chimney breasts has been removed from the ground floor and the First floor. I requested clarification on any works and the seller has suggested that she has not done any work and has lived at the property since 1989,
She also failed to mention that she had done work that was subject to building regulations and parity wall documentation of which no documentation exists. On arrival, I have noticed that the upper chimney is not properly supported and it is clear from the materials that are used that this was done far more recently than in 1989 and the brickwork for the chimney is coming apart in the loft.
Thank you for your comment. Matters relating to the structure of any property are normally the remit of a purchaser’s surveyor.
However, if the seller has made a factual statement that no work has been undertaken and there is evidence that this was not accurate, then if you relied on that confirmation when entering into the contract to purchase the property, you may have a claim for misrepresentation.
If your aim is to recover the cost of any remedial works necessary, then this may not be possible, however. Whilst there is some legal authority that the cost of rectification can be claimed, the normal measure of damages that a court would award is based on diminution in value.
Diminution in value is broadly the difference between what was paid for the property and what it was worth with the defect. This may not be the same as the cost of fixing the problem.
Note: This is general guidance only and should not be relied on as a substitution for properly considered legal advice.