Bateman v. Steed et al., 2014 SKPC 81

• Judge: Plemel, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 16, 2014
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2014 SKPC 81;(2014), 443 Sask.R. 151 (PC)

Bateman v. Steed (2014), 443 Sask.R. 151 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] Sask.R. TBEd. AP.058

Charlene Bateman v. Les and Valerie Steed and Kelly Swartz

(7/13; 2014 SKPC 81)

Indexed As: Bateman v. Steed et al.

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Civil Division

Plemel, P.C.J.

April 16, 2014.

Summary:

Bateman agreed to purchase the Steeds' house for $30,000 without viewing it. Bateman took possession of the house on September 15, 2012. The contract of purchase and sale stated that Bateman would pay an initial $5,000 deposit with the balance to be paid on or before June 15, 2013. Bateman abandoned the property in June 2013. Bateman brought a claim seeking to have her deposit returned on the basis that the condition of the property was misrepresented by the Steeds, and by Swartz, the realtor who had acted as a dual agent in the transaction. The Steeds counterclaimed, asserting that Bateman owed property tax of $767.13, $200 for a wardrobe, $200 for plumbing services, $225 for missing drapes and $300 for cleaning.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the Steeds 50% liable and Swartz 25% liable for Bateman's total loss of $5,757. Bateman herself was responsible for 25% of her loss. Therefore Bateman was entitled to judgment in her claim against the Steeds, jointly and severally, in the amount of $2,878.50. She was entitled to judgment against Swartz in the amount of $1,439.25. The Steeds were awarded judgment of $681.55 on their counterclaim. That amount would be deducted from the damages awarded to Bateman in her claim.

Brokers - Topic 3150

Duties of broker to principal - Real estate brokers - Misrepresentation - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508

Misrepresentation - Negligent misrepresentation - Bateman agreed to purchase the Steeds' house for $30,000 without viewing it - She subsequently brought a claim alleging that the condition of the property was misrepresented by the Steeds and by Swartz, the realtor who had acted as a dual agent in the transaction - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the Steeds 50% liable and Swartz 25% liable for Bateman's loss - Bateman herself was responsible for 25% - Mr. Steed did not speak truthfully and completely when he stated in the Property Condition Disclosure Statement (PCDS) that he was not aware of any roof leaks or moisture or water problems - He did not correct that misrepresentation by writing later in the PCDS that the roof needed shingling - The misrepresentation about leakage, moisture and water might be viewed as a fraudulent misrepresentation - At the very least it was a negligent misrepresentation - However, Swartz and Bateman also bore some responsibility - Before the sale, Bateman had emailed Swartz asking if the roof was okay - Swartz replied "Not leaking yet but does need attention" - In response to Bateman's question "Do you think that the roof can last the winter?", Swartz's replied "In my opinion the roof will last the winter" - Swartz was liable for negligent misrepresentation in stating that the roof did not leak yet - Swartz was aware of the water stains, suggesting that the roof leaked - She was negligent in not recognizing this and mentioning it to Bateman - Swartz said that she had advised Bateman to have a home inspection done or to see the house herself - That was not enough - She should have mentioned the water stains and forcefully recommended that Bateman see the house or have an inspection done - Bateman knew the roof needed attention - She had no reason to believe that Swartz was a roofing expert - Bateman rushed the sale of the house and failed to avail herself of some of the safeguards (including a home inspection) indicated in an ancillary services form provided to her by the Association of Saskatchewan Realtors.

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2829

Misrepresentation - Defences - Contributory negligence - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Sale of Land - Topic 807

The contract - Property condition disclosure statement - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Sale of Land - Topic 8758

Remedies of purchaser - Damages - Negligent misrepresentation - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Torts - Topic 6617

Defences - Contributory negligence - Particular cases - Reliance on apparent careless representation or negligent statements - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Torts - Topic 6631

Defences - Contributory negligence - Particular cases - Failure to investigate or inspect - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Cases Noticed:

Queen (D.J.) v. Cognos Inc., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 87; 147 N.R. 169; 60 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 10].

Snider v. Karpinski et al. (2009), 342 Sask.R. 235; 2009 SKQB 394, refd to. [para. 12].

Forbes et al. v. Morrison et al. (2014), 437 Sask.R. 124; 2014 SKQB 40, refd to. [para. 19].

Counsel:

Charlene Bateman, plaintiff, self-represented;

Michelle G. Marquette, for the defendants.

This claim and counterclaim were heard at Wynyard, Saskatchewan, before Plemel, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 16, 2014.