A White Rock woman has been awarded more than $200,000 after successfully appealing a decision that had put blame for money lost on the sale of her home squarely on her own shoulders.
According to B.C. Court of Appeal documents, Anne Audrey Hargreaves’ original claim was dismissed “on the basis that she had failed to act reasonably in mitigating her damages.”
Hargreaves listed her house for sale in June 2008. She was 71 at the time and looking to move to a smaller home, the documents state. After reducing the price twice, she entered into a contract to sell it to Harleen Kaur Brar for $845,000. Brar paid a deposit of $30,000 and agreed to complete the sale by Nov. 13 that year.
In the meantime, Hargreaves entered into a contract to buy a home for $580,000. The completion date for that deal was also Nov. 13, contingent on Hargreaves having the proceeds from the sale of her existing home to complete the purchase. When Brar was unable to complete by the deadline, Hargreaves – after refusing to grant an extension – relisted her home for sale. It eventually sold for $670,000; she purchased her new home for $550,000.
The original trial judge ruled Hargreaves “did not act reasonably in accepting the ($670,000) offer,” the documents state.
“In my view, the plaintiff acted precipitously, selling the property quickly and significantly below the appraised value. She failed to pursue available options and failed to take the steps a reasonable person would take.”
Court of Appeal judges disagreed.
“The appellant was entitled to accept a sure offer with a definite closing date in a falling real estate market that allowed her to complete the purchase she had contracted to make,” writes Madam Justice Risa Levine in the reasons for judgment. “The respondent did not prove that had the appellant not taken the steps that she did, or had she taken other steps, she would not have suffered the loss.”
Hargreaves’ award includes $169,356.25 in damages, payment of a $30,000 deposit with interest and court order interest from Nov. 13, 2008 to the date of the BCCA judgment. She is also entitled to double the costs of the trial, Levine writes.