No
Risk Management Corner Levert Hill v Associated Holding Group: Buyer’s Lawsuit Continues An Ohio appellate court has considered whether a buyer’s action for misrepresentation against a brokerage and its salesperson could proceed when the salesperson incorrectly told the buyer that she could lease the property to third-parties after purchase. In March 2010, Billie Levert-Hill (“Buyer”) contacted real estate professional Jason Caccamo (“Salesperson”) of Associated Holding Group, LLC, d/b/a Prudential Select Properties (“Brokerage”) about her interest in one of the Salesperson’s listings. She told the Salesperson that she planned to purchase the property as an investment and would lease the property following purchase. The Salesperson’s listing was in a condominium complex, and the so the Salesperson showed the Buyer two other units in the complex as well. The Salesperson provided the Buyer with an agency disclosure form stating that he represented the seller, not the Buyer, in the negotiations for his listing. The Buyer submitted offers for each of the units, but only the Salesperson’s client accepted the Buyer’s offer. Because the Buyer was not represented by a real estate professional, the Brokerage retained the entire commission from the sale. The Buyer requested the association’s bylaws from the Salesperson a number of times so that she could confirm that she had the ability to lease the property. The Salesperson never provided the Buyer with the bylaws and admitted that he forged her signature on a document which stated that she had received the bylaws. The Buyer had called the Salesperson in the midst of the closing to again confirm that she would be able to lease the property, and the Salesperson testified that he had told her that he had reviewed the bylaws and that she would be able lease the property. Following the closing, the Buyer was told by an officer of the condominium association that she could not lease the unit. In fact, the bylaws stated that unless the unit had been registered in 1994, it could not be leased without prior, written approval from the association’s board. Because the Salesperson knew that the Buyer would have only purchased the property if she could lease it, he asked the Brokerage to intervene and help the Buyer because of the bad information the Buyer had received from him. The Brokerage refused to help the Buyer, causing the Salesperson to move to a different firm. The Buyer filed a lawsuit against the Salesperson and Brokerage, alleging breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud. The trial court ruled in favor of the Salesperson and the Brokerage, and the Buyer appealed. continued on pg 15 REALTOR ® Update
May 2013 - page 7