Property Buyer threatening to take us to court

[London76]

Sorry for the long post…
We are selling our property and before putting it up for sale we painted the main areas of the house and bathrooms, but did not do the bedrooms or doors.
The property was advertised as ‘freshly painted’. The buyer is now threatening court action against us as after viewing the property (before she put in an offer) and getting the survey completed she apparently realised at some point that some of the doors and the bedrooms were indeed not all newly painted. She is now threatening to take further legal action for false advertising if we do not pay to get the remaining areas painted. We are legally under contract now so neither party can pull out without reason, but any advice as to whether she has a leg to stand on? I feel the term freshly painted is pretty vague but not sure where we would stand legally and if it is indeed misleading or misrepresentation to say freshly painted but have not painted everything. She is a solicitor and using the firm she works for to send us the legal letters so it feels a bit intimidating.
I’m more annoyed that she is doing this 3 weeks before we complete, after we have already agreed to delay the sale for 12 weeks to accommodate her financially. We are already losing so much money as we’re having to pay 2 mortgages until it’s sold!

Should you decide to do some cursory painting, spend as little money as possible and see if there's a paint reuse shop near. Mine here in the UK sells all paint for £1-3/l. I paid £5 for 5l contract white.

E.g. for Sydney I found https://circlepaints.org.au

She saw it, so it's sold as seen?
If she wants to be literal, with fresh paint on every surface, then a line of white paint across every surface is fresh paint across every surface.

You need legal advice on this - under the ACL she absolutely could make a claim for misrepresention (albeit innocent misrepresentation) and look for remedies varying from covering the cost of getting the property repainted to cancelling the contract and you having to reimburse her all of her costs.

If she's looking at renting the property out she will definitely be looking for a brand new freshly painted property and will push this as far as she can.

Don't let the real estate agent guide you, they're not experts in contract law or the ACL - you need a contract lawyer.

We dealt with a pair of psychopaths last year that kept nitpicking and we all (ourselves, mortgage broker, solicitor and estate agent) said they would pull something and they did. Three days before exchange they offered is £10k off the asking price (they also sent us a cleaning quote after we left for £500 because when they arrived 30 mins after we left the bins outside had not been removed!).

This was after we accommodated them. I would not be surprised if she pulled something like that.

ultimately she wants to
live in your house, she stands to lose her deposit which will be more than a tin of paint.

Get your solicitors advice. Then get them to write her strongly worded letter. Nip it in the bud now, I guarantee she will pull some sh*t now and probably after exchange.

she is not rational and likely writing whatever she can on headed paper from her work. Am happy to give you more pointers if you want to dm, good luck whatever happens, in a month it will be over either way

I’m not a lawyer. Nor do I work for a firm of solicitors. But…

Her issue is with the estate agent’s advertising. Refer her to the estate agent. She could conceivable make a claim against them rather than you. Going directly to you makes me think that she is an admin assistant in a legal firm rather than a fully trained solicitor dealing with property law. That, or she understands the law but is trying to coerce you into further price reductions with the threat of court.

I think (still not a lawyer) that she is referring to a ‘material fact’ and these are not considered to be concealed from a buyer if they are visible upon inspection. So if she viewed the property before making an offer, it falls on her, not you or your estate agent.

I’m also reasonable certain (but still not a lawyer) that this would be dealt with through the state tribunal system, not the actual courts.

Which state are you in? That may be relevant as this is state law, not federal.

https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/library/publications/housing-and-accommodation/buying-and-selling-property/material-fact-guidelines-word-accessible.docx

In fairness, if the new paint did not touch any of the bedrooms, then I think describing the entire house as newly painted was inaccurate. I am not suggesting that every door or skirting board should be newly painted, but at least all of the main rooms, which includes where people will sleep.

That said, she saw the house before making the offer so I think she has little room to argue if you dig your heels in.

But I do think that you should have pointed out which rooms were not painted when describing the house as newly painted.

When you view a house, and look at the paintwork, you're assessing the condition not whether it's still wet. You decide to redecorate because it looks tatty or you want to change the colour not because it's x number of years since it was last painted. I don't believe she actually wants you to paint any more of the house and leave it in an unknown condition, she's just wanting money off. I hope your solicitor and agent advise you are in the right. If you do any more painting, make sure that it's fresh but badly done - find someone like me to help who always gets run marks.

It's a foreign country so who knows but consumer law doesn't apply to private sales here, by definition a consumer is buying from a business.

I’d water down paint and paint the doors. And it’d be a shame if you painted over the hinges and some of the paint ran down the doors.
I’ve been told that if you have metal curtain poles you can stuff seafood into them. Might take a while to find where the smell is coming from.

In addition to the many good points made by previous posters, even if the whole house WAS freshly painted, by the time your removal company have taken all the furniture out, and hers have move furniture in, every wall is likely to be scuffed, and possibly even have dents that will need filling! So it really won’t make much of a difference 😂

Goodness, i thought everyone knew estate agents blurbs are quite creative in spinning the truth.

The ACL does apply to real estate agents, and therefore property purchases but that is why I think the buyer is in the wrong here.

Her issue is with the estate agent, not the OP. And, I think, if she were to make a legal claim, she would go after the estate agent, not the seller of the property.

That is why I think she is just trying it on to get a discounted price before settlement.

I suspect most people here can't comment on whether this is an issue in Australian law. In the UK it would not be.

However, you can say "it was freshly painted in 1995", or whatever!

I’ve just reread your post including what the purchaser included in her letter.

I’d have serious concerns that this was actually sent by a lawyer. A very quick google tells me that the ACL doesn’t apply to the vendors of residential property. It may, however, apply to the estate agent.

Most consumer guarantees only apply if goods or services are supplied in “trade or commerce”1. Transactions between a private seller and buyer are not ordinarily considered to be supplies made in “trade or commerce” because the transaction is not a business or professional activity2. This is why a person who purchases a home cannot ordinarily make a claim against the vendor for misleading or deceptive conduct or for a breach of consumer guarantee as the transaction will not normally be considered to be “in trade or commerce”.

Are you able to call and speak to the person named as sending the letter to confirm that they did indeed send it? That may jeopardise your sale if the purchaser loses her job as a result of her deception. But I would want clarification as to why they thought the ACL (as it is usually referred to, not lower case ‘consumer law’) would apply to you as the sale is unlikely to be in trade or commerce?

I am more and more convinced that the purchaser is trying to pull a fast one.

Hmm my opinion differs. Unless you specified which rooms had been repainted, just saying "freshly painted" implies the property is freshly painted. I would expect all walls to be painted in a freshly painted property. Not just some areas. Same way if a listing says "double glazing" I would expect all windows to be double glazed, not just the front of the house. Or "gas fired central heating" to mean the whole house, not just downstairs.

That being said, I have no idea what that means for you legally. It might be easier just to give the other rooms a lick of paint. Probably cheaper than sending solicitors letters.

I’m in Australia. I’ve had a buyer like this. Total pain. They just want you to offer a price reduction pre-settlement. Don’t ever talk directly with her or her agents. Are you using a standalone conveyancing firm, or a legal firm? Have a quick talk to a solicitor to get advice. IMO, She has accepted the paint job when viewing and subsequent offer. She will do a pre-settlement inspection. Go through the house on the morning of settlement and take videos/photos of everything. Turn the oven and cooktop on and show its working, turn taps on and show hot water working - kitchen and bathrooms, raise and lower garage door, lock and unlock doors, turn overhead fans/air con on & off, etc. open and close wardrobe doors. Photos of each and every room - with close ups of walls in question. Etc, etc.

The more air you give these people, the more it goes on.

Surely the issue is with the estate agent for advertising the property as freshly painted and not with you?

Does it say freshly painted or
freshly painted throughout

Theres a big difference.
The former doesn’t say everything has been painted but the latter does

A big estate agent here and most of them actually are very focused on the truth.
One insisted they couldn’t call our floor boards period they had to call them period ‘style’ as they couldn’t prove they were original to the house!

Another 15th century property we had the same problem. Apparently our timber structure had to be Tudor ‘style’. Despite the fact we’d had the dendros to prove our house was built 1435……funny thing is 1435 isn’t Tudor style either it’s Medieval.

They use flowery language but must fact check what they write.

Well that could mean anything.

Like a square metre of wall.

Or one door.

It didn't specify ''The entire house has been freshly painted to professional standards''

Good luck.

''It was freshly painted in 1963
With lead paint.
In a tasteful shade of Eau de Nil.''

IANAL but I was coming here to say exactly this.

The issue is between the buyer and the estate agent as her complaint is about the description- not withstanding the fact that the property was viewed afterwards where the buyer had clear opportunity to see what was “freshly painted” and what wasn’t.

The only possible issue can be between the buyer and the estate agent and even then, the description didn’t compel her to take action as she chose to view it in person which would supersede a written description. Paintwork is clearly visible - it’s not as if the buyer was concerned about non-visible aspects (wiring, eg). I can’t see how she can claim the advert was misleading and that it induced her to make an offer.

This is nonsense, she inspected the house before the purchase, and was satisfied it was freshly painted. Just stop responding.

Posting on a predominantly British forum for advice on a legal issue in Australia is not the best idea. Your buyer has a point that most people would assume “freshly painted” without qualification would mean all the rooms. If the law around property sales in Australia requires your statements about the house before the sale to be truthful (and given the contracts are binding after an offer is accepted, that’s not at all unreasonable) she may have a case and that could leave you liable for the cost of professionally painting the house and her costs bringing a case against you (as well as your own costs in defending the case). You need advice from a specialist in property law, not a bunch of well meaning MNers. As expensive as legal advice can be, it’s generally a lot less expensive than following incorrect advice from people who are outraged by the behaviour, but don’t know the law.

Solicitors will type up whatever you want. I'd find a cheep one and get them to type a one sentence letter saying "my client is of the view that you are "a cunt" ", and see how she likes that. Swearing at people isn't illegal there is it? If she carries on, I'd seriously paint the room black, one coat of the cheapest paint with zero care and attention taken. You said you'd help her and she saw desperation and the chance to capitalise on that. Stop acting amenable and she'll stop her nonsense, keep acting amenable and she'll get worse and worse. She's an arsehole. I'd ignore her first because I'll bet she's bluffing, then if she tries to take you to court proceed as above. And report her for unprofessional threatening behaviour too.