Robert Ingram, Temira Ingram v. Mary Ellen Bloomingdale
Published: Feb. 8, 2005 | Result Date: Feb. 16, 2004 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: GIC785029 Verdict – $116,654
Judge
Court
San Diego Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Facts
In December 1999, plaintiffs Robert and Temira Ingram entered into a written agreement to purchase real property in San Diego, from seller defendant Mary Bloomingdale. The plaintiffs were represented by defendant James Felder, the real estate agent. Because Bloomingdale's husband Francis Joseph was contemplating bankruptcy, the property was advertised as being subject to "approval by trustee." Felder never explained what the implications were to the plaintiffs as the buyers. When there is a trustee sale, the seller is exempt from having to prepare a Transfer Disclosure Statement (TDS) pursuant to Civil Code Section 1102 et seq. However, Bloomingdale did make a partial disclosure of the problems concerning flooding or drainage problems and the retaining wall on the northern portion of the property. The plaintiffs alleged that once the partial disclosure was made, under common law principles, Bloomingdale was under a legal obligation to make a full disclosure. Unknown to plaintiffs was the water intrusion problem that existed as early as five years prior to the sale of the property. Before the close of escrow, and at Felder's request, the plaintiffs hired home inspector Gregory Moore dba Professional Home Inspections. Given that Moore did not report any major defects, the plaintiffs proceeded to buy the property. Michael McNally, the property manager for the bankruptcy trustee Richard Kipperman, showed up at the property while Felder and the plaintiffs were present. McNally told Felder that he did not have any ability to purchase the home because it was part of a bankruptcy estate. The plaintiffs paid $129,000 for their home and escrow closed in May 2000. Thereafter, the plaintiffs became aware of the water intrusion problem which has resulted into mold on their property. The cost to repair the defect is $56,500. Even after repairs are completed, there will be a stigma associated with the property. Under Section 1102, the plaintiffs will be forced to disclose the water intrusion problem, the existence of mold on the property, and the repairs. The plaintiffs sued Bloomingdale for breach of contract and fraud. They also sued Felder and his employer for negligence, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiffs sued Moore, but he died and is no longer a party to the lawsuit.
Damages
The plaintiffs incurred a repair bill of $56,500 and have been denied use and enjoyment of their property for the last three and a half years. They will have to move out for two months while repairs are being performed. The plaintiffs sought damages in the amount necessary to repair the defects, stigmatic damages, damages for loss of use and enjoyment, prejudgment interest, and attorney fees and costs under Section 1717.
Result
The jury found in favor of the plaintiffs: $69,954 compensatory damages, $46,700 punitive damages against the seller, $22,554 costs and $55,827 attorney fees against the seller.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390