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, along with the entire team at ScriptaLegal, are here to assist you with the preparation of your legal documents and to answer all your legal questions.
What is the responsibility to monitor the alcohol consumption of their guests?
Me François Forget - July 28, 2007
What is the responsibility of a host who allows one of their guests to drive, despite the fact that the latter has...
A notarized will does not need to be verified by the court or a notary to take effect
Me François Forget - May 4, 2016
A notarized will, unlike a holographic or witnessed will, does not require verification by the court or a notary...
Respecting physical distancing means prioritizing virtual meetings
Me François Forget - January 12, 2021
Your notarized will and protection mandate can now be received via videoconference by a notary with...
This browser does not support this kind of file. Please download the file to view it: Download the file
An error has occurred.