Seller Can’t Hide Behind An “As-Is” Clause
Seller Can’t Hide Behind An “As-Is” Clause
By Bryan Mashian, Esq.
A common misunderstanding is that an “as-is” provision in a real estate purchase and sale contract relieves the seller of the duty to disclose to the buyer any of the property’s defects. Generally, even with an as-is provision, the seller must disclose facts known to seller that materially and adversely affect the value of the property, which facts are not known to or not readily ascertainable by the buyer.
Duty to Disclose
- An “as-is” provision in general will not override the seller’s duty to disclose material latent defects known to the seller.
- For example, one court ruled that the buyer could sue for fraud despite “as-is” provisions when the seller knew hazardous materials contamination existed on the property, yet represented there was none. The seller had built a concrete building over an area the seller knew hazardous substances existed yet did not disclose this condition to the buyer.
- In another case, the seller’s failure to disclose that a murder had taken place in a house 10 years earlier allowed the buyer to sue for rescission and damages. This court held that murder is not such a common occurrence as to impose on the buyer a duty to inquire about and discover it.
Buyer’s Background Bears
- Some courts have considered the buyer’s sophistication and experience and held that the buyer could not overcome the as-is provision to win a claim for the seller’s failure to disclose physical defects.
- For example, a court held in favor of the seller where the buyer was a businessman and a real estate agent.
- In this case, the court stated that this buyer therefore could be expected to be aware of the meaning of an “as-is” sale and to examine the property thoroughly. This buyer purchased a building without checking the basement which had a bulge in the wall and required extensive repairs.
When in Doubt, Disclose
- There is no bright-line test for determining whether the seller must disclose a known defect. The courts make this determination on a case by case basis. The courts consider and weigh various factors, such as the nature of the defect, the type of property and the parties’ experience.
- A good rule of thumb is that if the seller wonders whether or not to disclose, the seller should disclose because the defect is likely worthy of the buyer’s consideration.
- The seller should make the disclosure in writing to avoid any dispute by the buyer of the seller having made the disclosure.
- The seller preferably should make the disclosure as early as possible in the transaction to avoid wasting the parties time with the buyer who would not buy the property with such a defect.
A comprehensive “as-is” provision should at minimum state:
- The buyer has thoroughly and independently investigated the property and is fully satisfied with the property’s condition;
- Since not all buyers perform such due diligence, the clause should add that if the buyer does not perform these inspections, then the buyer assumes all associated risks;
- The seller has not made any oral or written representations or warranties;
- The buyer is purchasing the property “as-is,” with all known or unknown faults and defects.
Please Release Me
- The seller can further expand the protection of an as-is clause by having the buyer release the seller from all claims arising from the property’s condition. However, such an aggressive provision may make the buyer suspicious that the seller is hiding something and thus may not be acceptable in a traditional sale.
- But, when a lender sells a property it acquired via foreclosure, such a release is commonplace since the price is reduced in exchange for the buyer assuming more risk.
- A generic release in California only discharges known claims. The seller can have the buyer release unknown claims as well by including an express waiver of the applicable laws. In sum, regardless of how well-drafted and comprehensive an as-is provision may be, the seller should be mindful that the seller may still have to disclose to the buyer material defects known to the seller.
- Duration of Seller Warranties 4 Sep 2015
- Assume Loan or Take Subject To? 15 Jun 2015
- Cotenancy Breach Remedies 2 Apr 2015
- Finder – a precarious status 1 Dec 2014
- Commercial Brokers Must Disclose Agency 1 Sep 2014
- Risks of circumventing the safety clause 1 Aug 2014
- Making Enduring Sublease Deals 1 Jul 2014
- Emails May Create Deals – Unsuspectingly 24 Jun 2014
- Unintended Dual Agency 24 May 2014
- Perils of Dual Agency 23 Apr 2014
- Impact of CAM Estimates in LOIs 23 Feb 2014
- Liquidated Damages in a Rising Market 14 Jan 2014
- Limits of Profit Sharing in Leases 14 Dec 2013
- “Or nominee” and Its Problems 14 Nov 2013
- New Energy Use Disclosure Laws 14 Jul 2013
- New ADA Laws Could Provide Relief 14 Jun 2013
- Option to Extend May be a Mirage 14 May 2013
- Right of First Refusal and Broker’s Commission 14 Apr 2013
- Is broker paid after listing expires? 14 Mar 2013
- Seven Steps to Expedite Sales 14 Feb 2013
- Navigating CAM Expenses 14 Jan 2013
- Indirect Control of Lease Transfers 14 Dec 2012
- Impact of Foreclosure on Security Deposits 14 Nov 2012
- Negotiating Exclusive Uses 14 Oct 2012
- Build-Outs Made Easy 14 Sep 2012
- Profit Sharing In Leases 14 Aug 2012
- Recapture Rights In Leases 14 Jun 2012
- Structuring Lease Terminations 14 Apr 2012
- Owners Should Control Environmental Audit 14 Jan 2012
- Protecting Against Specific Performance Lawsuits 14 Dec 2011
- Impact of Foreclosure on Leases 14 Nov 2011
- Seller Can’t Hide Behind An “As-Is” Clause 14 Oct 2011
- Achieving Flexibility in Leases 14 Aug 2011