Real Estate

Buyer sued seller after purchased house

  • Last Updated:
  • Nov 27th, 2023 3:38 pm
Newbie
Jan 3, 2017
24 posts
12 upvotes

Buyer sued seller after purchased house

Hi all,

My family purchased a house in QC, paid 305K and sold at 310K a few years ago, and moved to ON. We did not do any renovation, just replaced carpet to the hardwood for one room and installed the new roof, so there was no chance to know any hidden defection. An inspection was done by a professional company chosen by the buyer. Inspection report pointed few things but buyer decided to purchase the house as it. After few months, they sued my family with few defected part they found while they renovate the house and asked us to pay 130K for repairing a house.

Our lawyer is based in QC as well and they do not give us any clue like we can win the case or not. They keep saying that only judge will figure out. We know that but for us, we can't even understand how this case can be issued. Buyer keep saying she purchased the house even she knows it's defective because she fell in love with that house. This is what buyer said to the court. Now we are expecting to present to the court, and our lawyer is suggesting us to settle the file for avoiding trial. After 4 years of this case, they are suggesting us to pay them. We have no trust with our lawyer but we do not have any other option since we do not know people, system, and culture.

It has happened for 4 years so far. My family already put a lot of money in this case, and last few years were such a terrible unfortunate for my family. We have never been experienced this kind of situation. We are an immigration family so not familiar with Canadian culture so far, but still, I wonder this is common in Canada that someone sues for this kind of reason. Also, we wonder the buyer really has any possibility to win the case so we need to pay them.

Any help will be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
54 replies
Deal Addict
Dec 23, 2010
1897 posts
969 upvotes
Moon
If you can prove that they were aware of the flaws of the house at the time of purchase then they have no case. This is the exact reason why you should communicate to the buyer any issue the house has and have it in writing. If you have proof that the professional inspector or yourself found issues with the house and thus the buyer was aware of them at the time they bought then you have a defense. Someone suing the seller for lying and hiding issues with the house they sold is very common. If the issues the buyer found were never disclosed to them then you may be ****.

Your lawyer sounds like a shit lawyer btw. Go to a different one.
Deal Fanatic
Dec 6, 2006
5805 posts
1972 upvotes
Toronto
What kind of defects are there costing $130k in a $310k house?
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
13006 posts
10009 upvotes
Edmonton
I don't think it's very common to happen; I've never known it to happen to anyone in my circle of friends, but that's a relatively small sample size.

As far as whether they have any possibility of winning, we have none of the facts related to the situation, so any advice on that would be un-informed. You might as well buy a magic 8-ball and gamble your 130k on it. I'm not sure how a "few defected parts" add up to $130k on a $310k house, though...

And anyone can sue anyone for anything. The question is, can they win? If the case is frivolous, you could counter-sue for your legal fees. But your lawyer obviously feels like there's enough risk in it to advise you to settle out of court. Either that, or he doesn't want to deal with it anymore after 4 years.

C
Deal Fanatic
Dec 5, 2009
5768 posts
3612 upvotes
You need a lawyer to advise you. And if you don't trust your current lawyer seek a second opinion for another lawyer.

Also, this is very important and where a lawyer needs to guide you.... There are two categories of defects. Patent Defect and Latent Defect.

A Patent Defect, is an obvious flaw, that would be discovered by a superficial inspection of the property by an ordinary purchaser, for example, a hole in the wall, or a crack on the side of the home. It is assumed that a potential buyer can observe this defect and raise any concerns as they see fit.
The general principle here is caveat emptor, or “buyer beware.” This means that as a purchaser, if the problem would have been revealed by an inspection, (either by yourself or a licensed inspector) it is your obligating as a purchaser uncover the defect. A seller has no obligation to advise a potential purchaser of patent defects.

A Latent Defectis one that is not known to either the seller or purchaser at the time of sale. Sellers do not generally have to voluntarily disclose most latent defects, the Courts have found an obligation on sellers to disclose material latent defects of which they are aware. Particularly those that pose a serious health or safety risk, for example, mould. .
A seller is not liable for any defect that they had no knowledge of.
Sellers can be liable for misrepresenting the property, which would include lying when specifically asked about something or actively concealing known defects.
What if the property is stigmatized, for example, if a murder or suicide had taken place in the basement of the property? The sellers have no obligation to volunteer this information. However, if asked directly, they are required to be honest.
Newbie
Jun 2, 2012
52 posts
7 upvotes
MONTR
First, I'm not an expert.

The house that you sold, had a "vice-caché". That you knew of it or not when you sold it does not matter. If the buyer proves that it existed when you still owned the house, makes you liable. The current owner can sue you for the vice caché. Unless you sold the house as is, without legal warranty.

You can say that this problem probably existed when your parents also bought the house but didn't know about it. They can then sue the previous owner also...

I think that's how it works !
Deal Expert
User avatar
Nov 15, 2004
21786 posts
4903 upvotes
Toronto
In all of English-speaking Canada if you buy a house and the seller didn't actively lie when asked about things then the buyer has no case. Everything is transferred at sale, including liability and pre-existing defects. It's why home inspections are so important.

This is Quebec though, so who knows with their weird legal system. Get a different set of lawyers to review the case. It'll cost you far less than a potential settlement.
Jr. Member
Apr 22, 2012
155 posts
30 upvotes
Quebec
Unfortunately here in Quebec people seem to have gone crazy with "vice caché", which allows people to sue for almost anything, even if it will be thrown out in court later on it is still a $$$ pain for you to defend yourself. Not to mention they can go back many owners back... I don't know your case, or your lawyer, but I don't like him/her from what you're telling us, I certainly would not just pay them to settle without looking at your options. If the buyer did get a proper inspection and defects were noted, they cannot go back after the fact complaining about the said defects. If they find other things and that's what they're using in their lawsuit, then it will depend on whether it fits the vice caché definition or not. For instance, someone sued because they found their home had poor insulation when they opened the walls to renovate, but the judge ruled agaisnt the buyer since the home was built according to standards in place in the year of construction (in this case, about 30 years ago I think). You cannot expect an older home to be built to today's standards.

My advice would be to get a better lawyer unfortunately... While expensive, it is still less costly than settling the case if you did nothing wrong. I've dealt with a lawyer firm in Montreal that only does construction cases, PM me if you would like their info, they might be a good place to start. Good luck!
Deal Fanatic
Jul 3, 2011
6517 posts
3798 upvotes
Thornhill
That $130k cost is a considerable chunk of the sale price.

You've not said what it is supposed to cover but that it's more than one-third what your parents sold it for which means the buyer is suing for something significantly gone wrong, what is it - mould? rodent infestation? radon?

You've also not said the amount of time between your parents' buying and selling it. since it is significant that the buyers sued just a few months after buying it.

And because you've not said what the issue is no one can know if the inspection should have uncovered it.

That's all information that should be considered before even attempting to answer you.
Banned
Dec 5, 2015
2038 posts
429 upvotes
Concord, ON
boyohboy wrote: What kind of defects are there costing $130k in a $310k house?
Cost of repairs don't have much bearing based on market price of a house...E.G...It'll cost the same to replace roof of a 2m house as in Toronto as a 500k house in Barrie given same roof area
Deal Addict
Nov 11, 2004
3503 posts
615 upvotes
Ottawa
Iv heard of this happening quite often in Quebec, buyers are constantly sueing sellers for any reason.

It seems like it only happens in Quebec... :twisted:
Hello
Deal Expert
Oct 7, 2010
15536 posts
5790 upvotes
Buying in Quebec is more trouble than it's worth.
Deal Fanatic
Jun 29, 2007
6041 posts
2751 upvotes
Vancouver
At the very least, talk to 1 or 2 more lawyers and see what they say.

Lawyers will usually give you a free initial consultation.

Provincial bar association can also refer you to qualified real estate lawyers. In B.C., they will refer you to lawyers who will charge you something like $25 or $30 for initial 30 min consultation.
oneofjay wrote: Hi all,

My family purchased a house in QC, paid 305K and sold at 310K a few years ago, and moved to ON. We did not do any renovation, just replaced carpet to the hardwood for one room and installed the new roof, so there was no chance to know any hidden defection. An inspection was done by a professional company chosen by the buyer. Inspection report pointed few things but buyer decided to purchase the house as it. After few months, they sued my family with few defected part they found while they renovate the house and asked us to pay 130K for repairing a house.

Our lawyer is based in QC as well and they do not give us any clue like we can win the case or not. They keep saying that only judge will figure out. We know that but for us, we can't even understand how this case can be issued. Buyer keep saying she purchased the house even she knows it's defective because she fell in love with that house. This is what buyer said to the court. Now we are expecting to present to the court, and our lawyer is suggesting us to settle the file for avoiding trial. After 4 years of this case, they are suggesting us to pay them. We have no trust with our lawyer but we do not have any other option since we do not know people, system, and culture.

It has happened for 4 years so far. My family already put a lot of money in this case, and last few years were such a terrible unfortunate for my family. We have never been experienced this kind of situation. We are an immigration family so not familiar with Canadian culture so far, but still, I wonder this is common in Canada that someone sues for this kind of reason. Also, we wonder the buyer really has any possibility to win the case so we need to pay them.

Any help will be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Penalty Box
Aug 11, 2005
4175 posts
1432 upvotes
The above posters have no idea what they are talking about. You need to see a litigation lawyer, not a real estate lawyer. You MUST defend the allegations, otherwise it will be a default win for them. The easiest way to release all liabilities from yourself is to pretend you didn't know about the defects and pull the sellers who you bought the house into this lawsuit.
Political avatars and signature are not permitted.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Feb 11, 2007
21248 posts
25711 upvotes
GTA
Sorry to hear about your trouble OP. Definitely find a new lawyer and fight it if you can.
If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.
Deal Fanatic
Mar 15, 2005
6024 posts
1873 upvotes
This must be a provincial thing because I can't imagine the same happening in Ontario.

What exactly was wrong with the house that it required $130K in work? They would but nearly gutting a $300K house...

Anyway, no seller can really certify anything behind the drywall. If everything was in good condition at the time of the same I don't see how this is even a case, but again, it could be a Quebec thing.

[edit]I did find this, which seems truly bizarre even though the scenario seems to be more about during the closing window, not well after.

https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/ ... -buildings
A defect is "hidden" if meets these three requirements:

It is not apparent and cannot be noticed by a simple examination.
The buyer does not know about it.
It existed at the time of the purchase.
The seller is responsible for a hidden defect even if, at the time of the sale, she did not know it existed.
Deal Addict
May 12, 2014
3487 posts
3895 upvotes
Montreal
This is why you sometimes see house sales listed "as is, with no legal warranty" in Quebec. It's the only way I would ever sell a car or house. Otherwise, you could be sued even 30 years later by the purchaser.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Sep 8, 2007
10978 posts
14474 upvotes
Way Out of GTA
Wow. This vice cache in Quebec is truly horrifying. I can see this as a bonanza for lawyers on both sides and for professional buyers...knowingly buying a house with likely defects (given age, area, condition, etc) then all of a sudden using vice cache during renos to extract large sums from the seller...who just was selling a house..no more no less. Which is what it appears here.

1) your lawyer appears to be a scammer (in on the scam)... Run up the bills for 4 years then recommend to settle? Why was this not recommended at the outset? Nice legal business on both sides - pros on the buyer side working with flippers to buy likely defective houses then suing under vice cache. Scam lawyers working on the seller side...run up bills then suddenly recommend settling
2) why would anyone ever ever sell a house in QC other than as is - where is? Else you are on the hook for every defect accumulated since the house was built. Even if no case on the buyer side...they can threaten to run up your legals and still extract money out of you. Those trusty lawyers do not have your back.
3) too much coincidence that only a few months after "during renos" all these defects came up. Sounds like a scam. $130k? Why not the whole cost of the house. Even if they run it back to $50k to make you feel like you escaped...this is still a bonanza for both lawyers and the buyer and likely pays their whole renovation bill. Wonder if they've done this before?
4) I could see if vice cache was put in place to go after bad builders and bad contractors where something ignorant was done (taking out a support beam and just covering it up)..but this puts the onus solely on the seller...not fair.

The horrors of vice cache explained here:
https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/ ... -buildings

From another article...are you freaking kidding me? Responsible for something only discoverable upon excavation????
Here are some examples of defects which have been considered as latent by the Courts of justice:

– the misrepresentation of the existence of a defect by the seller in order to mislead the buyer;

– a defect that an expert, generally competent, could not discover;

– a defect which can only be discovered by excavation or demolition.

On the contrary, the apparent defect, a defect which can be discovered by a prudent and diligent buyer without the need of an expert, is not covered by the legal guarantee.

Here are some examples of apparent defects according to the Courts of justice:

– the wear and aging of a property constitute apparent defects;

– an excess of humidity and the presence of mold are apparent defects, if these elements could be identified by a simple visual examination;

– when the immovable presents evidence which leads to suspicion of the presence of a potential defect, the prudent and diligent buyer who has not called upon an expert must do so, unless he did perform a satisfactory assessment himself.[7]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 12, 2006
4360 posts
585 upvotes
Messed Up Area
Home inspectors are a joke, but reality is they can only comment on what they see.

Realtors will ask tonnes of questions when listing a house, as a home owner you must answer them correctly ( yes/no/unknown), if you answer yes or no you are acknowledge truth or lying about a possible issue, answering unknown will be truth 99%. Buyer must disclose any known issues....aka if roof leaked and you replaced you must state roof was replaced due to leak, as there could be internal damage.

Buyers will use both realtors listing info and home inspectors info on determining if house is good for them or lower price....

Lawyers,, they will kill you in fees or payouts.....4 years, what the hell..........damn, my lawyer would had passed it along to previous homeowner ( prior to your parents ), if the real estate listing was truthful, and had it settled within 3- 6 months.

Post the details of the 130k reno......I'm guessing illegal electrical work, mold issues( leaking roof or plumbing ), and possible asbestos that was not declared, as well as undeclared renos( no permits ).
Jr. Member
Apr 22, 2012
155 posts
30 upvotes
Quebec
FrancisBacon wrote: This is why you sometimes see house sales listed "as is, with no legal warranty" in Quebec. It's the only way I would ever sell a car or house. Otherwise, you could be sued even 30 years later by the purchaser.
You can still get sued even if you sell without legal warranty... It doesn't protect you if you *knowingly* did not disclose something you were aware of

Top