• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Being sued by former house owner

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

simpleguy01

Junior Member
What is the name of your state? Maryland

One and a half years ago, my wife and I purchased a house in Maryland. After a home inspection revealed certain defects (deck, roof underlay and shingles, faucets, etc.), we and the seller signed a contract addendum stating that we require specific repairs be made. However, when we had our walk-through on closing day, NONE of the repairs had been made. We were ready to walk away from the deal, but the seller verbally agreed to give us $6000 to cover the costs of all the repairs listed on the addendum. This $6000 was issued to us via a check from the titling company that the seller signed over to us (Not in escrow). The seller believed the roof had been repaired by the owner prior to him, and we verbally agreed to refund some of the money (no stated amount) if he could produce evidence within 10 days that the roof had been replaced and was fully covered under warranty. We waited ten days, cashed the check without problem, and never heard from the seller for one year. During which time, we repaired the roof and some of the other items on the addendum

One year later, the seller notified us that this was his last attempt (even though it was his first) to come to some agreement regarding the money that was given to us for the roof repair, otherwise he would sue us. We notified him that we did not intend to return the money. Another 5 months pass, and we are summoned to court to defend a lawsuit filed by him for $5000 (the small claims court limit). In his defense, he states that he had a roof inspector certify that the roof was structurally sound and was good for fifteen years, and provides a document stating so. (Nevermind that certification was not part of the agreement.) We are certain that this roof inspector did not even enter the house or the attic, so there is no way he can honestly certify the roof. We also did not receive notice of this certification until the lawsuit was filed.

We have copies of all documents, including our home inspector’s report. Our real estate agent recalls the agreement and is willing to state so, but will be out of state on the court date. We believe the seller is representing himself, as he filed the lawsuit himself, but we are not 100% certain of this.

A few questions:
1. What is the general feeling about the strength of our side of the case?
2. Should we get a lawyer? If so, can we countersue for legal expenses and are we likely to recoup these expenses?
3. Is there anyway for the real estate agent to legally testify without being present? Will a letter suffice?
4. Should we have our home inspector testify, or is his report sufficient evidence?

Thank you so much to anyone who can help!
 


JETX

Senior Member
1. What is the general feeling about the strength of our side of the case?
Can't speak for others... but if the 'evidence' is as you present, my opinion is that your case sounds pretty good.

2. Should we get a lawyer? If so, can we countersue for legal expenses and are we likely to recoup these expenses?
A good attorney is always recommended. As far as recovering legal fees, talk with the attorney as it depends largely on the specifics of the claim and the court.

3. Is there anyway for the real estate agent to legally testify without being present? Will a letter suffice?
Really to your advantage to have him/her appear. But if not possible, get the statement in a signed and notarized affidavit.

4. Should we have our home inspector testify, or is his report sufficient evidence?
See above.
 
Last edited:

res_ipsa

Junior Member
Check your sales contract. It should (99.9% of the time) contain something that says "integration" or "merger" clause (you can wikipedia integration clause for more info). If it contains this then the guy has no case. The merger clause basically says that only the terms in the written contract are binding. Also, any oral contract to give the guy his money back would be barred by the Statute of Frauds.

If it was me I would get a lawyer. Show the lawyer your sales contract with the merger clause, then mention the Statute of Frauds to the lawyer. Ask the lawyer to call the guy suing you to demand they drop the suit. If the guy doesn't drop it, the lawyer will probably file a response with the court along with a motion for summary judgment. I wouldn't worry about your home inspector testifying because this suit should be dismissed before it gets anywhere near a court room.

P.S. I am almost 100% sure he doesn't have a lawyer because no lawyer would have filed the suit if the facts are as you have stated.
P.P.S Don't admit to the oral contract to anyone but your lawyer. You can't raise the Statute of Frauds defense if you admit to the existence of the contract in a court filing.
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top