Buyer finds defect, not treasure: what to do? | ScriptaLegal
Personal Business Packages & Subscriptions
Français About us Create a free account Log in
Interactive legal guides Legal frequently asked questions Legal blog Videos
ONLINE LEGAL DOCUMENTS
Legal blog > Real estate > When the buyer of a property discovers that they are not dealing with a treasure, but with a hidden defect

When the buyer of a property discovers that they are not dealing with a treasure, but with a hidden defect

The purchase of a property can be a source of problems for both the seller and the buyer, especially when the buyer discovers that they are not dealing with a treasure, but with a hidden defect.

«The treasure hunt is open!»

Buying a property can be a source of problems for both the seller and the buyer, especially when the buyer discovers that it's not a treasure, but a hidden defect.

Thus, buyers, following the acquisition of units in a completely renovated and restored condominium building, discover significant hidden defects. Four months after notifying the developer-seller to make the necessary repairs, the parties reach an agreement. According to this agreement, the developer-seller undertakes to pay 25% of the costs of the chosen contractor for the corrective work. During these works, carried out in the presence of the developer-seller, the contractor notifies the parties that he has found that the required corrective work is much more extensive than originally anticipated. The developer-seller immediately expresses disagreement and goes on vacation without suggesting an alternative solution. Despite this absence, the works continue, as they cannot be left unfinished.

Following the developer-seller's refusal to bear the additional costs, the buyers turn to the Court* to be reimbursed. The developer-seller argues that his refusal to pay is related to the absence of a written report on the aggravated defects and his disagreement regarding the additional work performed.

The court rejects the claims of the developer-seller since he:

- received a notification before the start of the work;

- had the time and means to verify the existence, nature, and extent of the defects;

- always had a representative present from the beginning of the work;

- was notified by the contractor, upon discovery, that the defects were more serious than anticipated;

- was required to proceed without delay, given the urgency of the work.

The court orders the developer-seller to reimburse the buyers, as he was not prevented from verifying the actual defects and necessary work. Furthermore, he did not demonstrate that he was able to repair the defects at a lower cost himself.

The difference between discovering a treasure or a hidden defect is that its discovery makes the former owners either happy or unhappy.

*C.A. 500-09-024441-149

François Forget, notary and legal advisor as well as the entire Notaire-Direct team, are at your service to ensure the preparation of your legal documents and answer all your legal questions.
Insurance and the principle of proportional indemnity
Me François Forget - June 22, 2009
In life, everyone has their own values, but don't forget that in times of trouble, insurers have values...
Before sending a text message, it is better to manage your anger
Me François Forget - January 15, 2020
The way we express ourselves, both in language and in means of communication, has drastically evolved in the last...
Does the mandate apply even if the incapacity turns out to be only partial?
Me François Forget - April 24, 2010
Being completely incapable or not being completely incapable, that is the question that will now be raised for...
This browser does not support this kind of file. Please download the file to view it: Download the file
An error has occurred.