I was sold a building which is not on title as what the seller said?

Question

I bought a 3 unit building a year ago. The selling agent and seller signed off there were no alterations, permit problems, additions etc. After I bought I found out it is on title as 5 units. The agent is a contractor who did the conversion to 3 units and never got it inspected by the city (just pulled permits) Do I have a slam dunk lawsuit or is the resp. on me and my buying agent for not doing the research with the city or otherwise and the fact that we signed off on everything? What could the defense use as an argument?

Answer 1

READ YOUR CONTRACT! There are probably clauses relating to compliance with local codes & zoning ordinances. As a general rule buyers have the responsibility of confirming code compliance, including closure of permits. However the contract laguage or local or state laws may change the general rule. And if so, lawsuit for what? Your damages may only be the cost of opening a permit & re-inspection. Most jurisdictions don't care if a 5 unit is reduced to three.

Answer 2

First of all, talk to a lawyer. I am not a lawyer.

That being said, I would think you are out of luck. It was represented as a 3 unit building, you saw a 3 unit building and you bought a 3 unit building.

Unless there was something materially wrong caused by the conversion and the seller did not disclose it, I'm not sure you have a position.

Good luck!

Answer 3

Before closing was there a title insurance policy? It's usually paid for by the seller and the title company does the title search which should have brought this problem to your attention before the closing.

Talk to an an attorney and look at your closing documents. You may have recourse

Answer 4

I think you should have gone to the city to check it out. The records are public. But you might have a case because the seller has to disclose all information to the buyer unless stated otherwise.

Answer 5

Tricky. See a Lawyer.