Sentences with phrase «fraud against a seller»

In Ballou v. Master Properties No. 6, the California Court of Appeal addressed a broker's allegations of fraud against a seller of real estate.

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

Not exact matches

Entrepreneur: What can sellers do to protect themselves against fraud?

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.

Vermont Life Insurance sellers can also rely on the Code to protect them against consumer fraud.

South Carolina Life Insurance sellers can also rely on the Code to protect them against consumer fraud.

Prosecuted breach of financial warranty and fraud claims against, and obtained eight figure settlement from, sellers of various private manufacturing companies.

South Carolina Life Insurance sellers can also rely on the Code to protect them against consumer fraud.

Vermont Life Insurance sellers can also rely on the Code to protect them against consumer fraud.

Further, the court ruled that since the seller didn't seek damages, but rather wanted to rescind the sale, the seller had no basis to assert fraud against the broker, who wasn't a party to the purchase agreement.

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.

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

In Bartsas Realty, Inc. v. Nash, the Supreme Court of Nevada reviewed the dismissal of a broker's claims against a property seller for: (1) tortious interference with contract; (2) breach of oral agreement; and (3) fraud.

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.

Stephens v. Sponholz (251 A.D. 2d 1061)- purchaser's causes of action against seller for fraud and negligent misrepresentation stand; the «as is» and general merger clauses of the purchase agreement are not specific disclaimers and do not preclude a cause of action based upon fraud in the inducement of the contract; issues of fact remain as to whether seller made express fraudulent representations concerning water in the basement of the house or actively concealed the problem and whether purchaser could have discovered the defect by the exercise of reasonable diligence.

Delano v. Umbreit (10 Misc.3 d 1054A)-- cause of action exists against seller in fraud where seller elects not to provide PCDS and provides $ 500.00 credit and after such election makes a false representation about the heating system and concealed the true condition of the heating system (seller installed dummy heating vents in walls, lied about it post contract and later admitted knowing about the subterfuge).

Troiano v. Tuccio (227 A.D. 2d 467)- fraud; disclaimer provision in sales contract between purchaser and seller does not inure to benefit of broker; complaint against broker alleging broker fraudulently induced purchaser to purchase property is reinstated.

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