I don?t blame them for suing!
Whatever happened to the old adage, ?Disclose, disclose, disclose??
?Couple Sues Realtor Over Sale Of House Where Double-Murder Occurred?
Tony Van?Alphen
The Toronto Star
Eric and Sade-Lea Tekoniemi?thought they had bought their dream home in Bowmanville last fall.
But it turned into a house of nightmares after they learned it had been the scene of a horrific double murder 15 years earlier.
That discovery has now led to a lawsuit against the real estate firm, an agent and the house?s former owners for allegedly failing to reveal the home?s history.
?I suffered panic attacks and am still on anxiety medication,? Sade-Lea Tekoniemi said Monday of her response to living in the house.
Eric Tekoniemi noted he also felt stress at work and less companionship at home. The uncertainty about his wife?s health and the frequent trips to the emergency room were hard on him, too.
Although the couple said they wanted to cancel the $253,000 sale as soon as they learned of the house?s history, their lawyer said it was too late because they were legally bound under terms of the deal.
But the Tekoniemis decided to sue those involved in the sale of the split-level, partial-brick house, with a claim filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
Ron England, who suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, murdered his mother, Marian Johnston, 74, and stepdaughter, Jenny, 6, in the home on April 2, 1996. He stabbed his mother 34 times and the child 89 times. The little girl was left lying on the floor with a knife embedded in her heart.
The Tekoniemis?are seeking $450,000 in damages plus costs, from Re/Max First Realty, agent Mary Roy, and former owners Arthur Hewer and Sharron Lindsay, who had themselves purchased the home several years earlier.
The claims made in the lawsuit have not been proven in court.
Ron Gordon, the broker-owner of Re/Max First Realty, would not talk about the case, saying, ?I don?t discuss company business with people outside the company.?
Hewer and Lindsay said their lawyer advised them not to speak about it because the case is before the courts. Roy could not be reached for comment.
The couple filed the claim last week. The defendants have not yet submitted statements of defence.
The Real Estate Council of Ontario, which regulates the industry, issued a warning to Roy last month on the grounds that she ?deliberately withheld a material fact known to her? regarding the murders from the buyers, contrary to the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act. The decision followed a complaint by the Tekoniemis earlier this year.
The council cited several provisions in the act?s code of conduct, including not engaging ?in any act or omission that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded as disgraceful, dishonorable, unprofessional or unbecoming a registrant.?
Lawyers say the case involves a grey area in common law on the issue of ?duty to disclose? ? and how to assess what information that entails.
If the claim proceeds to trial, it could become a test case for the doctrine of ?caveat emptor,? or buyer beware, and whether the couple?s situation is an exception to that general rule.
In their statement of claim, the couple described the murder information as a ?material defect . . . which stigmatized, psychologically impacted and tainted the property.?
The claim said Sade-Lea Tekoniemi had suffered severe depression, and sleep and mood disorders because of the murder revelation and living in the house.
She has experienced heart palpitations, shortness of breath, faintness, nervousness when sharp knives are not out of sight when not in use, and visualizing ?extremely graphic and horrifying images during unguarded moments? related to the murders, the claim added.
As a result of continuing health problems, the couple say they want to sell the home but recover any depreciation in value from the defendants because they want proper disclosure made to any future owners.
?
?
?
Another day, another article from the Toronto Star!? I may as well be selling subscriptions?
Actually, this story is being talked about quite a lot in the real estate circles right now.
But before anybody actually endeavours into the rules, regulations, laws, etc., most people just say, ?Wow, what the hell was the Realtor thinking??
You can cut a lot of corners in real estate, but it?s usually on the small stuff: photos on MLS, forging a missed initial, etc.? But when it comes to something as big as concealing that a brutal double-murder took place in the house you?re selling ? I have no clue what this Realtor was thinking.
Did she think she was working ?extra hard? for her sellers by disclosing a fact that might cost them tens of thousands of dollars?? Perhaps that?s her excuse.
Or maybe she just has no soul.
Thankfully, the presence of a soul is not required in order to qualify for your real estate license.? Just a wallet, a beating pulse, and a basic knowledge of grade-four math?
But this is a monumental f-up on her part!
This is an invitation for future litigation!
The words ?grey area? are used above to describe the obligation to disclose that a double-murder took place in the house, but I was always under the impression that if a person died in the home, it MUST be disclosed.
I?ve seen MLS listings where the caption reads, ?House Is Estate Sale ? Elderly Lady Died Of Natural Causes.?? I believe you MUST disclose a death in the house, and thus it?s better to say ?natural causes? than leave it open to speculation.
Perhaps I?m wrong, or perhaps there are different rules in Bowmanville.
Either way, the parties involved ? the sellers, listing agent, and listing brokerage, were all incredibly naive to think that this wouldn?t end up in court one day.
And the one fact we don?t know is this: were the sellers made aware of the brutal double murder when they purchased the house years before?
If they were made aware when they purchased the house, and they decided not to make the current purchasers aware, then I think it speaks to mens rea, or ?guilty mind.?? They knew that this fact was material, and would cost them, and they made a deliberate and calculated decision to conceal it.? That?s a crime, in my books.
You can only take caveat emptor so far.? There are measures in place to protect consumers, and until now, most Realtors believed that a death in the house had to be disclosed.? I?ve talked about this story to a dozen of my colleagues, and we were ALL under the impression that a death had to be disclosed.
Whether it is, or isn?t, I still think the offending parties were naive to think this wouldn?t bite them in the ass.
The sellers can blame the listing agent for advising the non-disclosure, and the listing brokerage can claim that they weren?t aware of everything that the listing agent did or didn?t do during the course of her business.? But in the end, all the parties are at fault.? The sellers concealed the fact, the listing agent encouraged them to do so, and the listing brokerage is guilty by association.? Sorry, but the only way to maintain integrity in this business is to fault the brokerage for the actions of the agents they employ.
I?ll follow this case closely and update you when we know what happens.
In the meantime, try to put a price on your ethics, your integrity, and your soul.
Tell me if it?s worth a few thousand bucks in real estate commissions or capital-gains on the sale of your house.
These people should all be ashamed?
ohio primary cell phone jammer g8 summit netanyahu aipac vanessa minnillo super tuesday
No comments:
Post a Comment