There are two types of defects that can be found during a home inspection: patent and latent. Knowing the difference between them can be important if you’re considering buying or selling a home.
A patent defect is a problem that you should have been able to notice during a reasonable inspection. This is because of the principle of caveat emptor, which means that the buyer is responsible for discovering all defects before agreeing to buy a property.
Visually Observable Defects
Patent flaws are a dime a dozen. The best part is that you don’t have to sift through hundreds of thousands of properties to find a few dozen with a nip or tip that will make your digits dance. Using the Observable solution can save you time, effort and money. Unlike the ole fashioned home inspection, the Observable solution does not require the appointment of an attorney or surveyor – you can use it at home or on the go. You can even do it all with a single swipe on your smart phone. To start, download the Observable mobile app from your favorite app store.
Caveat Emptor is a legal principle that states that a buyer should inspect and investigate any potential purchase. This principle is also known as “buyer beware.” It transfers the liability for quality assurance from the seller to the buyer.
The law is designed to protect consumers from a variety of problems that can arise after a sale. For example, if a product has a defect that could affect the safety of its users, the consumer should be able to seek compensation for those injuries.
This principle also helps prevent disputes between businesses that share information about the quality of a good or service. However, it is not a complete solution to every problem.
It does help prevent post-purchase disputes that result from an information asymmetry between the parties. This can happen if the seller has more information about a certain item than the buyer does.
In these situations, the seller may have a legal duty to disclose the item’s defects. For instance, if a company sells an air-conditioning unit that is wrongly installed or sized, the seller might be required to pay for a refund of the consumer’s money.
These claims are sometimes successful, but often not. The courts consider whether a defect is patent – something that can be discovered by ordinary inspection and vigilance on the part of the buyer.
If a vendor fails to disclose such a defect, it might be considered fraudulent. If a purchaser is aware of such a defect, they should report it to the seller immediately.
While this principle has been around for some time, it has been less relevant in recent years. This is because modern commerce, legal systems, and market economies have developed many regulations to protect buyers from fraudulent and misleading sellers.
Another issue with this doctrine is that it can put undue pressure on buyers, especially when they lack a specific knowledge or expertise about the item. This is why it is important to ensure that the seller provides you with sufficient information about the product before a sale is finalized.
Despite these issues, caveat emptor still lives on in some real estate transactions today. This is because the law does not require homeowners who are selling their homes to disclose any defects they discover about the home. This is due to the fact that it would decrease the value of the property.
Statute of Limitations
A statute of limitations is a law that limits the amount of time that a party has to bring legal proceedings. The length of this period varies depending on the nature of the offense and jurisdiction where it is being disputed.
Generally, the statute of limitations for a particular case will depend on what is called its “cause of action.” A cause of action is a legal theory that a plaintiff sets forth in his or her complaint. It can include breach of contract, negligence, strict liability, fraud, and many other things.
There are also a few laws that limit the amount of time a person can file a claim against another. One of these is the Builders Right to Repair Act (AB 800).
Under this statute, a property owner can make a lawsuit for certain defects within a few years after he or she purchases a home. However, this does not apply to claims for some misrepresentations made by a builder.
In addition, a home buyer has the right to sue under this statute if he or she has not received a deed to a property by a date that is set out in the deed. This date can be either the date of close of escrow or the date that a developer relinquishes control over a condominium association.
The statute of repose for these claims is four years from the date of substantial completion of construction. This means that a lawsuit can only be filed on the patent defect if it is discovered by a reasonable inspection and it results in injury or damage within four years after substantial completion of construction.
Some courts have determined that this statute of limitations does not prevent independent breach-of-contract claims based on the same construction defects. In a 2011 case, for instance, the Los Angeles Court of Appeal held that a claim for patent defects could be brought by an injured party even if it is not accompanied by a breach-of-contract claim.
Misrepresentation is a legal term used to describe a false statement of fact which induces a party to enter into a contract. If a person suffers loss due to a misrepresentation, they may be able to rescind the contract or seek damages from the person making the statement.
Misrepresentations can be intentional or unintentional. Intentional misrepresentations are those which are deliberate and made to deceive. Non-intentional misrepresentations are those which were not intended to deceive, but which are simply a result of the ‘ordinary course of business’.
The courts have a number of different categories which are used to distinguish between misrepresentations. They are called “Types” of misrepresentation and each type has a different burden of proof and remedy.
A misrepresentation is an actionable fraud under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 which applies only to those who are induced into a contract by the statement. The claimant must prove that they suffered loss as a result of the misrepresentation and that it was the fault of the person who made the misrepresentation.
Generally, misrepresentation can be classified into three main types: innocent misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation. Innocent misrepresentation is where the person making the misrepresentation had reasonable grounds to believe that the misrepresentation was true at the time it was made.
Fraudulent misrepresentation is where the person making a false representation knows that it is not true but still makes it. This is the most common form of misrepresentation.
Negligent misrepresentation is where the person who is making a misrepresentation does not know that it is false but does make it, with the intention of inducing the other party into a contract. This is the most common form of misrepresentation in law.
Under the new Patentees Act 2015, an individual associated with a patent application can be sued for inequitable conduct under section 61(1)(g) if they have made a misrepresentation or failure to disclose material information in a way which is material to the decision of the Patent Office about whether to grant the patent. This is often the most challenging part of a revocation action, as it requires that an individual has knowledge of a falsity at the time of making the misrepresentation and acted with knowledge of that falsity.
Among many other things, David A. Grantham is a contributing author to UmassExtension West Vancouver Blo. He is a renowned expert on real estate in BC.
Born in North Vancouver, Louisiana, Dr. Grantham grew up in Lower Lonsdale. He then went on to complete his business degree at the University British Columbia. As of this writing, Grantham has completed over 100 projects, including the development of a high rise building in Vancouver.
He is a husband, father, son, brother, and friend. He was a dedicated outdoorsman and enjoyed sports such as hunting, fishing, scuba diving, and snow skiing. His wife, Alison Grantham, and their two daughters survived him. He is survived by his wife Alison Martin Grantham and two daughters.