原帖由 精打細算 于 2006-12-12 22:33 发表3 r/ B' x5 G+ i
问了3个律师。 安排朋友到 Edmonton Centre for Equal Justice。 刚刚见了最后一个律师。 意见是 $ d' f6 y0 _& B# s H* T! X( e; k, d# p
500就给了吧, 别烦。 1 o* j0 z( u5 J9 L' K) ? 4 j4 t8 E2 o0 j. y' B现在连Edmonton Centre for Equal Justice的律师也不接,说在small claim co ...
一般的买卖合约上写着 "Warranties : attached goods and included unattached goods are in NORMAL working order and are free and clear of all encumbrances" & ~7 h" |# s( L2 d x/ \# x; v" L3 B+ D2 D7 x: m1 P& |
新屋住在 Small claim court 上写着 "...Atco send employee to inspect the furnace.. informed that furnace was not up to code and order us to replace furnace" 7 F+ F( |, ~* ` 3 C1 r- O4 J8 [! S- L- R想问一下, 为何Atco 说 not up to code, order to replace ? # V5 c- e# J1 c5 g1 ^- J ) g/ N- f" g; }% b. {What is the definition of "not up to code"
原帖由 多伦多来客 于 2006-12-13 10:13 发表 4 @" n, q2 ]! [0 H新屋主直接告你的朋友吗?不对啊,要告也应该他告第一买家,然后第一买家再告你朋友。' b0 Y$ s8 H0 c" @8 a8 B. l
如果第一买家拿不出Atco的鉴定,你朋友完全可以说是他装修搞坏的。 6 B) h: E; x7 I- w# {* U
买卖合同上总有个warranty的期限吧? 总不会无 ...
/ m& ^7 V! N6 L1 i
" S) a4 D" W- r( ?( a
. P. E/ e' b; A0 y对啊, 偶现在就义务帮朋友。奉陪到底, 到法院去。 第一被告列朋友为3rd party. 现在的argument 就是说 Seller does not oblige to Atco code compliance as it changes from time to time. 另外一个疑点是Caveat emptor applies. 在卖房子时,卖家已经offer 买家 get own inspection, to put in condition on contract 但是第一被告refused. 同时, 告人的买家也同时refused 了这等权利。