Sentences with phrase «fraud against a buyer»

In Newell v. Krause, the Supreme Court of Kansas addressed a broker's claims of fraud against a buyer, a seller, and related corporations.

Not exact matches

This is, in part, a quality control feature to protect against fraud and also an underwriting requirement to determine the buyer qualifications as a borrower.

Appraised value is often used directly by mortgage lenders to make sure a loan issued against the property is not inflated and to prevent fraud from buyers and sellers working in collusion.

Defended client in real estate dispute against buyer's allegations of fraud and failure to disclose material information.

Institutions from the Insurance Research Council to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners urge prospective buyers to «shop around» to get better coverage and to protect themselves against insurance fraud.

The buyers filed a lawsuit in 2001 against the salesperson alleging fraud.

The nine buyers brought a lawsuit against the Beemans, the Company, the Lender, and the Appraiser for engaging in a conspiracy to defraud, fraud, violations of the state's consumer protection act («Act»), and negligent misrepresentation.

They then brought a lawsuit against the Buyer's Representative and the Brokerage, alleging breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud.

The trial court had found that while the Appraiser and Lender may have acted with conscious disregard of the false statement made to the buyers, there was no evidence that they had actual knowledge of the Beeman's fraud and so the trial court did not submit the punitive damage claims against the Appraiser and the Lender to the jury.

The sellers claimed fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty against the buyer and the buyer's representative, arguing that the buyer did not make a good faith effort to secure financing, and that the buyer's representative failed to notify the lender that the sellers had agreed to lower the purchase price.

The Buyer filed a lawsuit against the Firm for the Broker's alleged failure to disclose the erosion on the property, alleging fraud and seeking punitive damages for the Broker's conduct.

The Buyer brought a lawsuit against the Developer, claiming that the Developer misrepresented the Neighbor's disruptive behavior and alleged negligent misrepresentation, consumer fraud allegations, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

The court affirmed the dismissal of all defendants except the buyer, against whom it affirmed the finding of fraud and award of $ 171,000 actual damages and $ 150,000 punitive damages.

A Maine federal court has considered whether a seller of a vacation home can successfully allege fraud against a broker when the only remedy sought by the seller was rescission of the purchase agreement between a buyer and seller.

The buyer brought suit against the seller, claiming fraud and failure to comply with the state's disclosure statute.

An Illinois court has considered whether a brokerage could bring a lawsuit for fraud and conspiracy against lender and buyers for failed transactions.

He filed a lawsuit against the former owner, the Listing Broker, and the Buyer's Representative alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation against all the parties, and breach of fiduciary duty allegations against the Buyer's Representative.

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts addressed allegations by buyers against a vendor bank for fraud and violations of the business practices act.

In Mouning v. Carswell, the Superior Court of Connecticut addressed allegations of fraud, negligence, and breach of contract by a buyer against a broker.

The court affirmed the dismissal of the fraud allegations against the Buyer's Representative because the Buyer had not properly plead those allegations.

Venezia v. Coldwell Banker Sammis Realty (270 A.D. 2d 480)- buyer's action against seller for fraud for failing to disclose toxic contamination of untapped ground water beneath the property and surrounding area dismissed; cause of action against brokers severed; buyer's claim of fraud against seller was extinguished upon closing as a result of specific merger clause in contract of sale; moreover, buyer's failed to allege that seller made any representation about the condition of the land's subsurface or groundwater and did not allege that seller engaged in concealment or otherwise deceitful conduct designed to prevent the discovery of such contamination; seller is under no duty to speak; salesperson of one of the defendant real estate agencies represented to buyer that the house was in good condition

Unfortunately for the buyer, the OUTSIDE title company did not follow some very simple procedures, which are required at Trident, to protect against wire fraud.

The Buyers filed a lawsuit against the Brokerage alleging fraud, claiming that they were damaged by the Brokerage's failure to inform them of the square footage difference and also the Brokerage's failure to give them a copy of the appraisal for the property prior to closing.

Next, the court considered whether the Buyers could allege fraud against the Brokerage, absent an agency relationship with the Brokerage.

The Buyer filed a multicount lawsuit against the Buyer's Representative, Listing Broker, and the Seller alleging violations of the state's property condition disclosure law, fraud, breach of contract, negligence, and deceptive trade practices.

One of the claims made against both licensees was that the Buyer's Representative and the Seller's representative had failed to register their business names with the Secretary of State and thus violated the state's consumer fraud statute.

The Buyer alleged that the Broker was liable for fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentations, and violations of the state's Consumer Protection Act, a statute which protects consumers against fraud.

The Buyer brought a lawsuit, alleging that the Broker was liable for fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentations, and violations of the state's Consumer Protection Act («Act»), a statute which protects consumers against fraud.

The Buyers spent over $ 20,000 remedying these problems and then filed a lawsuit against the Sellers alleging breach of contract and fraud.

HomeVestors of America, the «We Buy Ugly Houses» company, is cautioning home buyers against unscrupulous practices and lender fraud.