A person who bought our house and made our lives a living hell for 2 months between the offer acceptance and the closing date is now accusing us of misrepresenting information on a seller's disclosure form. While her accusations are completely untrue, and we are not even sure what exact potential problem she is refering to (she never contacted us directly, but send a letter through her attorney), we are not sure what we suppose to do in this situation.
We can rehire an attorney who represented us during the transaction. But we don't know, as of yet, the extend of the problem or why this woman blaming us for that.
I guess my question is what body of proof a buyer has to present in court in order to win a case of misrepresentation of disclosure form info? I assume it will end up in court, since we are definitely not settling for something that we are not responsible for. If we win the case will she pay our court and attorney fees? The house in question is in Illinois.

How long ago did this sale occur?

If she didn't mention the specific problem, did she mention an amount of money which would make her happy . . . . or is she just venting because it isn't as perfect a house as she had thought? Perhaps it's just a case of Buyer's Remorse.

Passing a copy of the letter along to your Attorney might be a good first step . . . . but unless there are more specifics, or a demand, I'd say mum is the word. She may just be fishing to see if you'll voluntarily cough up some money to silence her, and she doesn't mention an amount for fear that it might be too little when 10¢ might be too much because it acknowledges some responsibility.

If you don't feel even one iota of responsibility, then you don't want to pay her even 1¢. And with the events prior to Closing, I'd imagine that you're not too surprised at this turn of events.

Important Notice: This information is provided as basic educational information by the author and is not a substitute for the advice of an expert and/or the advice of a Lawyer. There is NO representation as to legality, accuracy, correctness of the herein information and the reader is strongly urged to consult an Attorney in the relevant jurisdiction to ensure accuracy before acting on this information..

The sale occured a little over a month ago. Her attorney contacted our attorney and agent with the accusation. This is how we found out about it. The letter identifies the general problem, however does not provide any specifics (how, where, when, etc. the problem occured, and why she thinks it is a "recurring" condition we should have known and disclosed).
We know 100% that the general problem she identified did not occur at any point of us living in the house (for 16 years).
There is no mention of money as of yet.

Our attorney will send a response to her party with the denial of this accusation.

How often do these cases end up in court?

WOW! I hate when these things happen. I have no great advise for you other than if you really did nothing wrong, don't sweat it. Use your attorney and just keep rocking out with the clients who want, need and respect your level of service.

Good Luck.

But I think dinulya is a SELLER who's now in Hawaii . . . . not an Agent in Illinois.

Yes, I am a seller, not an agent. We have moved to Hawaii, and cannot come back to Illinois to resolve the issue in person.

Absolutely go through your attorney for any future communications. Don't talk to her, email her or anything. And, if you have to show for court - SHOW for court.

I don't have any suggestions and us here, we're not attorneys.

But boy, we'd love to know what the real problem is - if you've been in the house 16 years and never had the problem - maybe something she did caused the problem to start - like some people hate rain gutters, remove them and then wonder why their basement started to flood.

Seems to me, in Virginia, that if someone sues, and the defendant wins, the defendant can ask the court for attorneys' fees. I have a $600 judgment that's been out there for 17 years on a former roommate. All because he didn't tell the court I had paid him something like $48 I owed him. He was required by the court to notify the court within "x" number of days and didn't. That stayed on my credit record even though it was paid and I had a cancelled check so I had to take him to court to get the court to "verify" it was paid. I had an attorney and the judge asked what his fee was and the judge sided with me for $600 judgment in my favor.

Let us know what's going on - at least here you can vent and maybe get an idea or two.

Sorry to hear of your problems did you hire an attorney to represent you in the closing, if not they typically represent the bank.

A sellers disclosure is not the end all to be all in a transaction.

Sellers often mistake selling "as-is" into meaning they do not have to disclose material facts.This is not the case.

Selling "as-is" means you still disclose but will not fix any problems with the property.

Usually on a disclosure form you select yes,no,don't know.

If you select don't know or leave it blank the buyer has a right to "their own inquiry".If they fail to use that right because they don't want to spend the money on inspection fees to investigate further it is on them.

All of this is predicated on you answering your disclosure TRUTHFULLY.

Now if you intentionally try to conceal something like termites with a patch job etc. that is "fraudulent concealment of a material fact".In that case you could be found guilty and have to payout.Those cases are very hard to prove.

To me it sounds like they are just fishing for money.If you filled out the disclosure honestly you should have no worries.

No legal advice.

generally, the seller and any broker/agent representing the seller has a legaly duty to perform a diligent inspection of all accessible areas of the home, in order to reveal and disclose any material defects to a potential buyer. This language is contained in most pre-printed real estate contracts and disclosures. It's not just what you actually knew of during the sixteen years of ownership. It's what you SHOULD HAVE KNOWN.

The listing agent has no duty to do any type of inspection of a house. This goes way beyond the scope of our expertise, ability and knowledge base.

If you do this for your listings you are making a big mistake and are doing your clients a disservice.

And how is a seller liable for something they should have known when the majority of sellers do not have a clue about the construction of the house they own let alone any problems with that construction?

I have to agree with you Big Toe. I'm not sure how the laws are in Illinois or in Nevada (shana land) but in MA. we are required to give the buyer a booklet outlining the benefits of hiring a licensed home inspector. Even when a licensed home inspector goes through a property, they constantly use the caveat, when an issue is not within their area of expertise, that the buyer should consult a licensed electrician, plumber, HVAC contractor, structural engineer, etc. For any real estate agent to conduct an inspection on behalf of the seller is not only unheard of, it's downright foolish. I would caution any inexperienced agent to never venture outside their area of expertise or dabble in an area that involves different licensing.

Back to the original posters issue. There's a huge difference in a buyer discovering an issue and that same buyer proving the seller was aware of that issue. Leave this with your attorney and trust in their judgement. The other item that may help you is, if you had an agent that conducted an inspection on your behalf. In that case you may be able to drop the whole thing in their lap. However, the chances of a RE agent morphing into a home inspector are slim.

Keep us posted please.

should have known = obvious, readily available info, etc.

so as a buyer, you would be completely content with that argument from a seller, when a defect known (or should be known) to the seller, based on a simple visual inspection, was not disclosed prior to sale? have you heard of a Transfer Disclosure Statement? this is basic stuff that ALL licensed agents ar required to know per their state licensing. the law generally imposes an affirmative duty of inspection and disclosure upom the seller. the seller and listing broker cannot claim ignorance. state laws vary, but I doubt that there is much deviation from state to state on this issue, as it is a general principle in law.

Well if it is obvious, and readily available info then an inspection by the listing agent would not be necessary to see it.

If it is obvious and readily available then the buyer, their agent and the home inspector should have picked it up. Since they did not find it then it must not have been obvious.

NC state licensing law says we should not step outside the area of our expertise. As agents we are not trained to inspect houses.

Our seller disclosure allows the seller to claim 'no representation' on all the items listed because it is the duty of the buyer to inspect the house before they buy it.

These problems occur from time to time. There are problems with buyers, but sometimes with sellers as well. Agents can't know complete story. It is one of many listings an agent handles. Mostly those are legal issues.