Seller claims realtor sold her Vancouver house for $425K below market value
Darryl Dyck
other
A Vancouver property owner took her realtor to court, alleging her house was sold for $425,000 under market value.
The woman sold her house in the city’s Dunbar area in 2017, according to court documents posted this week, following a judgment in the case.
According to evidence presented in a courtroom in Chilliwack in September, the now-94-year-old seller hired a realtor that fall to sell what was one of four properties she owned in the city.
The property was initially listed by realtor Dean Macdonald, a defendant in the case along with other staff at Dexter Associates Realty, at $2,289,000, court documents say. The court heard that the asking price was based on the sale of another home in the area about three months prior.
But at that time, Macdonald hadn’t actually seen the house.
It turns out, Justice Ian Caldwell wrote in a summary of the evidence, that it was not without issues. The property had an oil tank, Macdonald told the court, and the depth of the lot was going to be reduced to make room for a widening Dunbar Street.
Still, an offer came in six days after the listing went up. Someone said they’d pay $1.9 million, subject-free, for the property.
But before Macdonald could ask his client what she thought, the offer was withdrawn.
The next day, following a discussion with the seller’s property manager, but not the seller herself, the listing price was brought down to $1,998,000. The court heard the seller appeared to agree, as she signed documents related to the reduction.
Toward the end of the month – almost three weeks after the first offer fell through – another offer came in of $1.5 million. Macdonald brought the offer to the seller, and reminded her they’d only had two offers the whole time it had been on the market.
The seller instructed Macdonald to go back to the potential buyer and ask for $1.7 million. But the counteroffer was rejected, court documents said, and the seller agreed to the first offer.
A contract was drawn up and signed, including the price and a condition the seller and buyer agreed to. The court heard these facts were not contested.
But then, after a conversation with a lawyer friend who the owner had granted power of attorney, the owner started to have doubts.
Her friend and lawyer hired someone to appraise the Dunbar property, and that appraisal suggested the market value was several hundred thousand dollars more than the sale price she’d agreed to.
The appraisal suggested it was worth $1,925,000.
Litigation counsel was hired then, as the seller and her friend felt there was a “$425,000 shortfall in the sale price.”
The sale went ahead anyway, as planned, but the seller took her realtor to court, claiming he was liable for that alleged shortfall.
Based on the written reasons for Justice Caldwell’s decision, it appears he weighed the arguments from both sides, including expert testimony.
The seller claimed her realtor failed to act in her best interest, failed to “exercise reasonable care and skill in his performance,” failed to act honestly and failed to “take reasonable steps to determine the fair market value of the property.”
She also claimed Macdonald failed to market the property in a way that would result in her getting the best price, as well as other alleged failures including that he did not put her interest before all others.
But the judge said there was no evidence before him that would prove “on a balance of probabilities” that the realtor breached any of the duties of care he owed.
“In coming to this conclusion, I cannot help but note that, as previously mentioned, the seller presented absolutely no affidavit evidence in support of this application. There is no evidence from the seller that she has any complaint with Mr. Macdonald, his actions, his advice or for that matter, the sale price of $1,500,000. There is nothing challenging what Mr. Macdonald says occurred,” Caldwell wrote.
Ultimately, he dismissed the claims against Macdonald and others at Dexter Associates Realty, and found the defendants were entitled to their legal costs.
© 2022 All rights reserved.