Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-00256 '~f'~" 'I' J~~)""(p ,,~'tf ., fi'i" . / _0,__ - '01 " ((\"-~ ''-- ..'So. i I'"!"" rb.p po ~. CX~' UJ 'lf~ CO en ~ /~:. - . ,,~i~i'fi '(,.f. , .....:-1..' . .."'" (~ ;;] -~-t{O "oJ'?'; (,1': :;,;. 1i.ltU, cur.!.; a i ,I" I g II !Ii:, 'J "~ '..., ';,; ii, .! '1'1, I> I', U', I ,;,~' ,L!" j., '1"" "\ " _;i:',,-, -, ;,:\~ -j" 15, The allegations contained in paragraph 15 represent a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary, By way of thrther answer, Defendants respond as follows 10 the subparagraphs: a, It is specitically denied that Defendants represented that the home was of particular standard, quality or grade when it was of another Defendants fully disclosed the material conditions of the home at or beft)re the timc of selllemcnl b. It is specifically denied Ihat Defendants inadequately disclosed any known water problem on the sdlers' disclosure statement By way of t\Hiher answer, Defendants fully disclosed any known defects in the property on the sellers' disclosure statement, and said statement speaks for itself c, It is specitically denied thai Defendants engaged in any Iype of ti'audulent conduct which created any likelihood of coni lis ion or misunderstanding to Plaintifl's. Further, it is specitically denied that Defendants withheld any information regarding any known water problem or defect in the basement of the house, 16, The allegation set forth in paragraph 16 constitutes a conclusion of law to which no response is necessary, 17, The allegation sel forth in paragraph 17 constitutes a oonclusion of law to whioh no response is neoessary, .4. ,~' 5. According to such statement, Defendants herein advised Plaintiffs that the Defendants were aware of a past water problem that was cured in 1986. 6. No other water problems were disclosed by the Defendants herein to the plaintiffs herein at the time of sale. 7. In June of 1996, the Plaintiffs herein, as a result of water problems in the basement, had the property inspected and learned for the first time that the basement wall showed signs of leakage, that water drained into the basement floor, that water seeped in from the mortar joints, and othewise, that in the basement of the home at 608 Belle vista Drive, Enola, there were ongoing water problems since 1986, despite the express representation of the Sellers (Defendants) to the contrary. 8. As a result of the aforementioned representation by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs that the water problem was cured in 1986, Plaintiffs relied on said statement and purchased said home at 608 Belle vista Drive, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 9. As a result of the aforementioned problems which were revealed to them in 1996, plaintiffs have been advised that to correct the water problems that now exist in the home, they will have to expend the sum of $5,000.00 to correct the pre- existing water problems. 10. The Plaintiffs believe and therefore aver that the problems of water in the basement were fraudulently conoealed by the Defendants (Sellers) as follows: A. Defendants failed to disclose to the Plaintiffs herein at the time of settlement, or before thereto, that there was a current and/or existing water problem in the basement of the home; B. Defendants undertook a course of conduct to cover and/or otherwise keep from inspection the fact that there were water problems in the basement by attempting to waterproof the walls and otherwise oonceal the water problem in the basement; C. Defendants failed to expressly disclose the ongoing water problem by disclosing that the water problem was oured in 1986; D. Defendants failed to disclose there was an ongoing water problem despite the knowledge that the Defendants had that the problem was ongoing; E. By signing a Disclosure Statement expressly indicating that the problem was cured in 1986 when the basement wall was reconstructed, the property was contoured and the drainage system cured at a time when they knew Plaintiffs were relying on said representation, whlIe at the same time, Defendants knew the said representation was false. 11. As a result of the aforementioned representations, Plaintiffs herein have been caused to suffer damage in the amount of $5,000.00, being the amount necessary to correct the ~roblems with the water in the basement. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray this Court to grant jUdgment against the Defendants in favor of the Plaintiffs in the amount of $5,000.00, together with costs and interest in an amount requiring arbitration. COUNT It 12. Paragraphs 1 through 11 above are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. 13. The sale of residential real estate is within the purva of the Unfair Trade Practice and the Consumer Protection Law (73 P.S. Section 201.1 et seq.) 14. 'l'he actions of the Defendants in making false representations with regard to the condition of the premises and in attempting to conceal the latent defects which existed constitute unfair methods of competition as defined under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. 15. The conduct of the Defendants in violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law consisted of: A. representing that the home was of a particular standard, quality or grade, when it was of another; B. failing to comply with the terms of the Disclosure statement by fully disclosing the nature of the water problems with the home; and C. engaging in other fraudulent conduct which created the likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding, including failing to disclose the existence of water probl.ems in the basement of the home, and otherwise concealing the same through efforts of the Defendants. 16. The acts and omissions of Defendants as set forth above constitute unfair acts or practices under the Pennsylvania Unfair Tx'ade Practice and Consumer Protection Law. 17. The Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practice and Consumer Protection Law grants Plaintiffs the right to bring a private action to recover damages sustained as a result of the Defendants' acts, which said acts entitle Plaintiffs to recover treble damages and such other relief as the Court deems necessary. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request the Court to grant judgment in their favor and against the Defendants in tho amount Wr.LLIAM HOY ilnd [(OI\F:H'I'^ 1111'/, his wifo, ,Iii;' ! (//1 iN TIII( ('(HIIU' ()I' U JMMON PLEAS OF (~lJMIII\RI.ANIl COlJNTY, PENNSYLVANIA l'1,'ll.nl'.l C I'n NU ~l '\ (, CIVIL 1998 v. DENNIS KRAMER and KA'l'l\[,p:I::r,! KRA/1ER, his wife, OeEenc1anbl, RULE 1312-1. The Petition for AppolntllllHIl or t\rhlil'lllora ,hull he ,uhstlullllllly Inlhe following fonn: PETITION FOR AI'('OIN'I'!'\'U:N'l' OF ,\IUIITltATORS TO THE HONORAIl,LE, THE JUDOES OF SAID ([O!JRT:" ' I, J\:~ \, ' I b :n.j.Illl.1 \')('h\'l" ,),\IS'l! N 1'\ l [,,\';1,) 1\1 11',1\ )11[1((1>'\ I ~ P. Richard Wagne r, ,l:!!'!.9.l.~ J t'r'...~_,__." coun,el for the plaimiWduftHdlllllcin the above action (or actions), respectfully represents that: \. The abovc,cllptioned a~tlon (Of n<:llon,) I, lil\le) Ilt Issue, 2, 11Ieclalrnoflheplalnlll'flnlh"ill:lionl~S~i.LOI)O,OO, 01\)8 attorneys' fees & interest TIle counterclaim of Ihe d"f"ll<llInl in II", II~tloo Is The following attorneys are inltHesled inlho ~as"(s) ItS cOUlls"llll' are otherwise disqualified to sit as arbitrators: VA ,HI' '\')'0 i C:"'II"Char1es M. suti{, Esqulre~~J).II\ III (,//I. 1\) il,'f 11,\ " 11111\ 111',\ WHEREFORE, your pet lIooer prays your submitted. Respe lIy submitted \ I I (') A (IY/(10/1clftV 10 IA 14 '".[I' vy, ) '}! AND NOW, . ,__,__,__._____, 19_. in consi1eralidn of the 7 7(~ -' ) L( 15 , foregoing petition. 11 '~I ) _,J, tL;t.~" , ____._~__- Esq" pe:w...1rt. MMwdY (.... ,,'r 1 'Ijll f'" " ES~", and ,/N /i.tr!::.. lYIaJ, (.e~ll~..)~lL_~_'~._, JSlI', Ilftlappointed arbitrators in the'above capti~ned ac~on (or aCllOnS) 'IS pl1lyed fOr,) ~ 1",\ )',\0 " W- Nt,' I, 'Ii I, h .:I,'II! l'flU , , I ! I '!)' \11" "1,.11'/ PIC' I I' " " !' \ !.( 'I ' ~I I" I,',," "f, /"/1" (, ' " I I)SO h~(h(/)~VJl\ (,,)1\\\ \ ',':;,)' 11111/s 'k I ' J;I') Pl \U (CI j\\\\~ \)ij \+ ' , 11l1omble COlll'llo uppnlntlhl'ce (3) arbitrators to whom the case shall be Ol( .II, "01\1 I ,j< ,I', ,Ill,) I, /'/! C i. __ 'H) II,' i I , ! , ' (l,\ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) In The Court of Common Pleas of ClIDlberland Couney, ?ennsylvania 1/' ~lo, I \ , ., {, 19 _"" ,{'vIII (,';. ,'i ,'>f/ll'l , I Ii,: OATH {,e do saleumly swear (or affirm) that we 'Nill support, ob~y and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitutioo of this Common- wealth and that we will discharge the dueies of our office with Eidelity. .\ l I" l_~ ,/ ,J ,.,_e, rr { ~air:nan /, '\ ,,,WARD 'Ne, the \mdersigned arbitrators, having been duly appointed and 9wor.n (or affirmed), make the following award: (Note: If damages for delay are awarded, they 9hall be separately stated.) j i) t I__.L'I ,I 1'\-1.-'. ,"',---,J ','f' I i";' . { l /I' '. ('\'1.( 'I:'\.C. &,.;(i~r_ , \_ L~1 J . (( , I {.: '"", I. )~,,' ( .. / " ." "ii_, , / "'_____,~\. ",if l..' / .~- {, . Arbitrator, dissents, (Insert name i! applicable.) Date of Hearing 14LL/-'1 'I /, ' Date of Award: '/ h ,I ~ " ( \.1 .'1 ( tic Chair:nan --- I'", I ( " NOTICE OF ENTRY OF AWARD ! J/ ) Now, the ('day of " ,~I ( \ award was entered upon the docket parties or their attorneys. , 19'r/' ' at I~, j2,:t., the above and notice r.hereof given by ,nail to the Arbitrators' comoensation to be paid upon appeal': $~I('\. r1r \ j / ;;, , /, ,_ \ I f( ./ I ( 3y: , J. - ) " J,- , ""-', i " ) .r' :'):'0 thon?t,ary <' , .. I ' , -' ~--'<' //: .,) _ J ( L...l.-._ , Deo,tlt:'