SMF - Just Installed!

sale and rent back

Started by KENNETH74430, January 10, 2016, 01:53:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

KENNETH74430

sale rent back accelerated possession defence on basis of fraudulent misrepresentation 20 min hearing set
s21 only issued because tenant started asking questions regarding contract
possible outcomes if judge sees any fraud in sale and rent back transaction
tenant has solicitor and barrister acting on her behalf
will this be an expensive outcome if landlord looses his case
your thoughts would be appreciated

KENNETH74430

has anybody here had a sale and rent back contract if so i would like to hear what your experiences was

Angel_Commercial_Finance

Hmmm.

The tenant is saying what, exactly? if she has a solicitor and barrister acting, I imagine they've advised her she has a genuine chance of success, BUT a couple of points intrigue me.
Has she been paid the purchase price? What was the fraudulent misrepresentation?

If the DJ on the s.21 hearing thinks there may be something in the defence, he will not decide the dispute there and then, as he's only got 20 minutes, but adjourn it to another date. I'd say you could be looking at 2 days in the County Court for a contested case before a Circuit Judge. Expensive...  :'(

If the tenant has already been paid the price, a claim of misrepresentation will, if successful, result in the court treating the contract as rescinded from the start and both parties go back to the position as if the contract had never taken place, i.e., she will have to repay the price and the purchase will be treated as void. She will recover the property, the L will get his money back. This is different from a claim of breach of contract as it involves pre-contract statements of fact which are claimed to be untrue and were relied on by the part claiming misrep. as a reason for having entered the contract.

But fraudulent misrepresentation is is a very high burden of proof. The courts don't arrive at a finding of fraud - i.e., dishonesty, lies, etc., without very strong evidence. If the court finds that fraud was in fact involved, the guilty party can expect to be blown out of the water. S/he will get absolutely no sympathy whatever, and quite right too.