Homebuyers need to know a lot of things when making a purchase.

One of these is the principle of buyer beware.

According to a B.C. Civil Resolution Tribunal, what that means is that a buyer is required to make reasonable enquiries about a property they wish to purchase.

Tribunal member David Jiang explained that this principle is subject to a number of exceptions.

One of these exceptions is fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation on the part of the seller.

These considerations were at play when Jiang ruled on a claim filed by Daniel McRae, a homebuyer.

McRae bought a home from Jamie Paksi in 2019.

When McRae moved, he cannot turn on the air conditioner that was attached to the home’s furnace.

Technicians later determined that the furnace was faulty.

McRae filed a claim before the tribunal, asking for an order for Paksi to pay $3,990 for the cost of replacing the furnace.

Paksi cited the principle of buyer beware as defence, and maintained that he didn’t know of any issues with the furnace or the air conditioner.

The tribunal ruled in Paksi’s favour.

“The parties agree their contract of purchase and sale included a property disclosure statement (PDS),” Jiang recalled in his reasons for decision.

On the PDS, Jiang related, Paksi “indicated on the PDS that he was unaware of any problems with the heating and central air conditioning system”.

According to Jiang, in order to show fraudulent misrepresentation, a claimant must demonstrate, among others, that a respondent knowingly made a misrepresentation of fact.

“The evidence shows the respondent reasonably believed the furnace and air conditioning unit were operational,” Jiang said about Paksi.

According to Jiang, the seller said that he “used the furnace leading up to the home sale without any issues”.

“I find this was likely the case, as he provided gas bills showing usage from April up to May 17, 2019, when he terminated gas services after selling the property,” Jiang said.

Jiang noted that the gas bills “support the conclusion that the respondent thought the furnace was safe and operational”.

McRae bought the home in May 2019.

Jiang also recalled that McRae said “in arguments that the furnace was running when his home inspector looked at it”.

“This is consistent with the respondent’s submission that the furnace appeared functional when he sold his home,” Jiang wrote.

McRae argued that a furnace is key part of a home, and therefore there should be a safe furnace when a house is sold.

Jiang reiterated that based on the principle of buyer beware, the property disclosure statement “only obligates a seller to disclose their current actual knowledge of the property to the extent set out in the PDS”.

“That knowledge does not have to be correct, nor are the statements in the PDS warranties,” Jiang explained.