Bauexperte
2012-01-16 12:37:45
- #1
BGH on the duty to inform when buying a house: Documents do not replace an explicit notice
A seller only fulfills their duty to inform by handing over documents if they can expect the buyer to review the papers not only for general information but with a specific focus. If a property is only seemingly quite large, a few open words of clarification are already necessary.
House plot sold that appeared significantly larger than it was
The buyer of a property with a house built on it demands damages from the sellers.
The sold property has an area of 759 square meters and is enclosed by a solid wooden fence.
A 185 square meter part of the neighboring property was included in the enclosure.
At first glance, this partial area seems to belong to the property as a front garden due to its gardening design, the enclosure, and a four-meter-wide entrance gate and driveway located within it.
Help, they have shrunk my property!
During the contract negotiations, the sellers handed over a folder with various documents to the buyer, which included a site plan. It shows that the front garden does not belong to the sold property. It is disputed between the parties whether the sellers also pointed this out orally.
BGH saw a need for clarification
The sellers should have explicitly informed the buyer that the front garden is not part of the sold property.
The enclosure of a house property gives prospective buyers the impression that it is a unified, externally closed property.
The sellers did not fulfill their duty to inform simply by handing over a folder with documents to the buyer.
A seller only fulfills their duty to inform by handing over documents if, given the circumstances, they can reasonably expect that the buyer will review the documents not only for general information but with a specific focus. Such circumstances exist, for example, if the seller hands over an expert report to the buyer concerning possible defects.
Since it is not yet clarified whether the sellers orally communicated the special circumstances to the buyer, the BGH has referred the legal dispute back to the court of appeal for further clarification.
(BGH, judgment of 11.11.2011, V ZR 245/10).
A seller only fulfills their duty to inform by handing over documents if they can expect the buyer to review the papers not only for general information but with a specific focus. If a property is only seemingly quite large, a few open words of clarification are already necessary.
House plot sold that appeared significantly larger than it was
The buyer of a property with a house built on it demands damages from the sellers.
The sold property has an area of 759 square meters and is enclosed by a solid wooden fence.
A 185 square meter part of the neighboring property was included in the enclosure.
At first glance, this partial area seems to belong to the property as a front garden due to its gardening design, the enclosure, and a four-meter-wide entrance gate and driveway located within it.
Help, they have shrunk my property!
During the contract negotiations, the sellers handed over a folder with various documents to the buyer, which included a site plan. It shows that the front garden does not belong to the sold property. It is disputed between the parties whether the sellers also pointed this out orally.
BGH saw a need for clarification
The sellers should have explicitly informed the buyer that the front garden is not part of the sold property.
The enclosure of a house property gives prospective buyers the impression that it is a unified, externally closed property.
The sellers did not fulfill their duty to inform simply by handing over a folder with documents to the buyer.
A seller only fulfills their duty to inform by handing over documents if, given the circumstances, they can reasonably expect that the buyer will review the documents not only for general information but with a specific focus. Such circumstances exist, for example, if the seller hands over an expert report to the buyer concerning possible defects.
Since it is not yet clarified whether the sellers orally communicated the special circumstances to the buyer, the BGH has referred the legal dispute back to the court of appeal for further clarification.
(BGH, judgment of 11.11.2011, V ZR 245/10).