Question:
Buyer closes on a house finds out a pedophile lives across the street wants to sue sellers and agent for not disclosing… thoughts?
Answer:
There is a reasonable case to sue the Sellers for non-disclosure of a latent defect.
The defect does not have to materialize in terms of actual damage or an actual assault. The undisclosed risk is the problem. The Sellers “knew” and concealed this information. A latent defect does not have to be something “physical in the house”, it can exist in a neighbouring environment, as long as it might pose a risk.
If the Sellers told the Listing agent, then their own agent must disclose the information under TRESA. However, in most cases, the Sellers would keep this information to themselves.
A lawsuit would claim the costs of re-selling the property and their consequent losses and expenses which could be rather substantial.
There was a case, Dennis v. Gray where Justice Hoy concluded that a convicted pedophile who lived across the road could be considered to be a latent defect in the house being sold. While the particular case was simply a decision on a Motion and the matter never reached Trial, Justice Hoy today is a member of the Ontario Court of Appeal.
Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker