Fraudulent Real Property Sales Agreement, Warranty Deed, Subsequent Settlement Agree.

[Rooty1]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Idaho

Greetings, 6-years ago purchaser bought real property from seller. The original sales agreement stated the property had not been surveyed but if a
problem arose, seller would "take care of it."

3-years ago, original agreement was amended and all language relating to the property line was removed. The snake-of-a-seller also added language that he "cannot be sued."

A few months ago buyer discovered seller had the property surveyed prior to closing (6 years go) and then intentionally misrepresented and failed to disclose where the actual property line boundary line was - off by an acre!

Because the first sales agreement is fraudulent, it is void. Does that make all future agreements - that rely on the first (now void) agreement - null and void as well?

Will the "you cannot sue me" portion of the amended second agreement be upheld even though the seller's sole purpose in including it was an attempt to wash his hands clean?

 

[justalayman]

what was amended? What you are saying makes no sense.

does the property description in the deed match what you purchased, or believed you purchased?

Generally, if you buy property, if you want it surveyed, you purchase a survey.

Because the first sales agreement is fraudulent, it is void.

No, it is not void. At best, it might be voidable but it would take you suing to have that decided by a court. What, exactly, are you claiming was fraudulent in the sales agreement?

 

[Rooty1]

No, it is not void. At best, it might be voidable but it would take you suing to have

1) What was amended? The subsequent settlement agreement amended the original purchase agreement.

2) Does the property description in the deed match what you purchased, or believed you purchased? Yes, the description matches but seller claimed no survey had been done when, in fact, it was completed prior to purchase. Seller hid the survey. The survey clearly shows 1/3 of purchased property - including the home - was/is sitting on neighbors land.

3) Asking judge to void both agreements. The first is clearly fraudulent. Seller took out all language in the supplemental agreement that spoke to the property line.

So, the question is this: Because the original sales agreement was fraudulent, and the seller intentionally deleted the property line issue via the supplemental agreement (in an attempt to avert liability if he ever got caught) does the "promise not to sue" found in the supplemental agreement stand?

Confusing - I know

 

[ecmst12]

If you had title insurance, you would be covered.

 

[justalayman]

1) What was amended? The subsequent settlement agreement amended the original purchase agreement.

2) Does the property description in the deed match what you purchased, or believed you purchased? Yes, the description matches but seller claimed no survey had been done when, in fact, it was completed prior to purchase. Seller hid the survey. The survey clearly shows 1/3 of purchased property - including the home - was/is sitting on neighbors land.

3) Asking judge to void both agreements. The first is clearly fraudulent. Seller took out all language in the supplemental agreement that spoke to the property line.

So, the question is this: Because the original sales agreement was fraudulent, and the seller intentionally deleted the property line issue via the supplemental agreement (in an attempt to avert liability if he ever got caught) does the "promise not to sue" found in the supplemental agreement stand?

Confusing - I know

If you made some subsequent agreement with the seller, it isn't that it voids the sales agreement or anything else. It simply is a new agreement that you chose to enter into. If you are claiming it was done unilaterally, then it has no force and the original agreement stands.

The survey clearly shows 1/3 of purchased property - including the home - was/is sitting on neighbors land.

incorrect. If the property description and the survey match, what it shows is you did not purchase the house and the 1/3 of the property you thought you were purchasing.

as to the claimed property line not aligning with the actual property line; your bad for not having a survey. There might be hope though. What was indicated on the disclosure document concerning encroachment issues?

the statement concerning the ability to sue; again, if it was a unilateral alteration, if means nothing. If it was something you agreed to, it may very well be enforceable. You are going to have to ask a court to determine the enforceability of the statement. You have the complete contracts available to you, I don't. You really need to take them to a lawyer who can read all the associated documents and render an opinion for you. Doing what you are here is not going to result in anything meaningful.

as to title insurance doing any good:

if you do have title insurance, it will cover the area of land in the description. Outside of that, it will do you no good. Since this concerns property outside of the described area, there is nothing title insurance will do for you.

 

[Rooty1]

Thank you.