Question

Michael and Patricia Sewak bought a house from Charles and Hope Lockhart. Prior to the sale, the Lockharts had employed a contractor for $12,000 to renovate their basement. Somehow, the main structural support that held up the house was removed during the renovations. Shortly after moving in, the Sewaks noticed that the kitchen floor was not level, that doors were not in alignment, and that the first and second floors were sagging. They hired a consultant, who investigated and determined that the support column was missing and that an illegal jack, found in the back of a heater closet, was used to provide the needed structural support. The consultant predicted that the absence of the structural column would ultimately result in the collapse of the house. The Sewaks filed suit, alleging fraud and a violation of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL). The Sewaks maintained that the Lockharts should have informed them that the support column had been removed. The trial evidence, according to the appellate court, permitted the jury to find that the Lockharts not only had knowledge of the column’s removal, but also took steps to conceal its replacement with the illegal jack, and that they had not obtained the proper building permits before undertaking the renovations. Did the Lockharts act ethically in their dealings with the Sewaks? Should the law impose a legal duty on the Sewaks to investigate and discover the absence of the structural support column for themselves?

Answer 1

The Lockharts did not act ethically in this case. They were trying to put the blame entirely on Sewaks, which is not correct. The Lockharts had information about the column’s removal. They had also addressed the absence of the column with a replacement. Hence in court, they were trying to bluff the jury by showing ignorance about the column’s removal.

In my views, the Sewaks did not have any involvement in the column’s removal or its substitution, hence, the court cannot impose legal duty on the buyers. It is the responsibility of the seller to disclosed all information about their property, ethically and accurately, to the buyer, before finalizing the contract. The buyers did not have any substantial role to play, in this regard.