BEING SUED...Am I liable?

What is the name of your state? CA

This is concerning a residential property which was sold in April
2002. The house was put on the market through a reputable R.Est. Co. now over a year later, I'm being sued by the buyer. He's claiming ''Breach of Contract''-'''Fraud''..''Negligent Misrepresentation"'-"Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress''-just to name a few of the Causes of Action. Additionally he's seeking consequential, exemplary, & punitive damages in the sum's "according to proof", at time of trial.

This lawsuit is primarily based on a guest house, that was not built w/ the proper permits, etc.

From what I understand, the buyer was in the process of adding on to the main house when he was visited by the Dept of Bldg & Safety, perhaps due to the noise...or mess he was making with the construction going on.

Nevertheless, they looked at the property and informed him that the gst house was illegal, and I believe ordered him to take out the kitchen area,etc, because it was not to be lived in. Originally, when the bldg permit was taken out, it was approved for a "Storage Bldg"...at a later date, it was converted to include facilities such as a small kitchen area, bath, etc. but no new permits were taken out w/ Dpt. Bldg & Sfty.

The R.E Brk, their Agts, etc were definetly aware of the fact that the structure was approved as a storage bldg only, however they did advertise it as a "House w/ a guest house".

The buyer was aware of this too, and it was not until the Dept of Bldg & Safety paid him a visit and ordered him to make changes, did he seem to have a problem. Also he is claiming that he was unaware that the property had a septic tank, and was not hooked up to City sewer lines, and is sueing for this as well.

The purchase aggrm't clearly states that it was permitted for
"storage only", and that it had a septic system. On the Real
Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement form, Page 2 (Sect C) Question #5:"Room additions, structural modifications, or other alterations or repairs not in compliance w/ bldg codes"...the YES box is cleary marked. The Agents Inspection Statement Report forms advise him as follows: "Strongly recommend to have the property professionally inspected to determine it's condition".

But regardless, the buyer is claiming that the R.E Co...or others ,forged his signature and initials on certain documents,and withheld certain documents pertaining to this purchase, from him.


He is also sueing the Loan Broker, claiming his loan was at an
inflated rate, due to racism and accused all the of defendants of conspiring against him, in the sale of this property. (The R.E Brk is who recommended the Loan Bkr, as well we used the same Agts, both buyer and seller.

I had an Att'y answer the Summons on time, but he has just nformed me that he is going to drop the case because it's too complicated, and he is not a R E. Att'y. He also, is a personal friend, but R. E. Law is not what he specializes in, and he doesn't feel comfortable representing me in this case. So I'm back to square one, it seems.


What I do not understand is why are all the other Co-Defendants (incl the Loan Co & their Agts) represented by the same Firm, everyone but me? It doesn't seem right that they (the R.E Co.) tell me to go after my Home Owners Ins. Co, to make them pay for my legal expenses, etc.. After all, I did nothing wrong, and trusted them to handle this sale professionally, only to wind up with this nightmare. Isn't there some sort of protection against this when you sell your home?

I am rather confused at this point, and really feel as though I'm getting screwed in this mess, excuse my language, please!

Why would they leave me to fight this individually and separately, when everyone else is being represented, jointly?

Do you suppose it is because I did not make a big issue out
it initially, and they weren't about to offer anything, unless they
absolutely had to? How often does this type of incident occur, and is there nothing I can do but accept it? Although it's not the case with me...what would one do if they didn't have the money and or means to obtain the proper representation, just get raked over the coals? These things...I wonder!

If you have any suggestions on where I might go from here, I would surely be grateful for your advice.

Once again, thank you for taking the time out to answer my endless questions and concerns.

[HomeGuru]

Originally posted by AfinemessInCA
What is the name of your state? CA

This is concerning a residential property which was sold in April
2002. The house was put on the market through a reputable R.Est. Co. now over a year later, I'm being sued by the buyer. He's claiming ''Breach of Contract''-'''Fraud''..''Negligent Misrepresentation"'-"Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress''-just to name a few of the Causes of Action. Additionally he's seeking consequential, exemplary, & punitive damages in the sum's "according to proof", at time of trial.

This lawsuit is primarily based on a guest house, that was not built w/ the proper permits, etc.

From what I understand, the buyer was in the process of adding on to the main house when he was visited by the Dept of Bldg & Safety, perhaps due to the noise...or mess he was making with the construction going on.

Nevertheless, they looked at the property and informed him that the gst house was illegal, and I believe ordered him to take out the kitchen area,etc, because it was not to be lived in. Originally, when the bldg permit was taken out, it was approved for a "Storage Bldg"...at a later date, it was converted to include facilities such as a small kitchen area, bath, etc. but no new permits were taken out w/ Dpt. Bldg & Sfty.

The R.E Brk, their Agts, etc were definetly aware of the fact that the structure was approved as a storage bldg only, however they did advertise it as a "House w/ a guest house".

The buyer was aware of this too, and it was not until the Dept of Bldg & Safety paid him a visit and ordered him to make changes, did he seem to have a problem. Also he is claiming that he was unaware that the property had a septic tank, and was not hooked up to City sewer lines, and is sueing for this as well.

The purchase aggrm't clearly states that it was permitted for
"storage only", and that it had a septic system. On the Real
Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement form, Page 2 (Sect C) Question #5:"Room additions, structural modifications, or other alterations or repairs not in compliance w/ bldg codes"...the YES box is cleary marked. The Agents Inspection Statement Report forms advise him as follows: "Strongly recommend to have the property professionally inspected to determine it's condition".

But regardless, the buyer is claiming that the R.E Co...or others ,forged his signature and initials on certain documents,and withheld certain documents pertaining to this purchase, from him.


He is also sueing the Loan Broker, claiming his loan was at an
inflated rate, due to racism and accused all the of defendants of conspiring against him, in the sale of this property. (The R.E Brk is who recommended the Loan Bkr, as well we used the same Agts, both buyer and seller.

I had an Att'y answer the Summons on time, but he has just nformed me that he is going to drop the case because it's too complicated, and he is not a R E. Att'y. He also, is a personal friend, but R. E. Law is not what he specializes in, and he doesn't feel comfortable representing me in this case. So I'm back to square one, it seems.


What I do not understand is why are all the other Co-Defendants (incl the Loan Co & their Agts) represented by the same Firm, everyone but me? It doesn't seem right that they (the R.E Co.) tell me to go after my Home Owners Ins. Co, to make them pay for my legal expenses, etc.. After all, I did nothing wrong, and trusted them to handle this sale professionally, only to wind up with this nightmare. Isn't there some sort of protection against this when you sell your home?

I am rather confused at this point, and really feel as though I'm getting screwed in this mess, excuse my language, please!

Why would they leave me to fight this individually and separately, when everyone else is being represented, jointly?

Do you suppose it is because I did not make a big issue out
it initially, and they weren't about to offer anything, unless they
absolutely had to? How often does this type of incident occur, and is there nothing I can do but accept it? Although it's not the case with me...what would one do if they didn't have the money and or means to obtain the proper representation, just get raked over the coals? These things...I wonder!

If you have any suggestions on where I might go from here, I would surely be grateful for your advice.

Once again, thank you for taking the time out to answer my endless questions and concerns.

**A: duplicate post.