• nyan@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Are they claiming that the event has given the property a bad reputation that reduces its value by that amount? I suppose those are plausible grounds for a lawsuit. I can’t think of any other way a death on the property several years ago could cause damage to the new owners. Surely they’re not claiming that the house is haunted (and if that’s the issue, I can imagine the judge being extremely unamused).

    • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I would think it could be hard to convince someone that the property had a bad reputation while at the same time claiming that you didn’t know about it. A “reputation” implies that it’s common knowledge, or at the very least, that it’s easy to find out about. Which means that if you didn’t know about it, you didn’t do your due diligence.

      • nyan@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        My suspicion is that they didn’t talk to the neighbours until after they bought the house. So, yeah, lack of due diligence.