The North Holland District Court (ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2025:6641<\/a>) earlier this month rescinded the purchase agreement of a home in Bloemendaal due to serious flooding in the basement<\/a>. The leakage was such that the house could not be used normally. The buyers, an elderly couple aged 76 and 86) dissolved the purchase agreement for that reason. The court went along with this and also ordered the seller to compensate the buyer's damages. Real estate lawyer Robert van Ewijk discusses the ruling and explains what it means for practice.<\/p>\n The case involves a Villa Rodesteijn located on the outskirts of Bloemendaal. The villa is more than 100 years old. Cobraspen, a real estate developer from the Haarlem region, has owned the villa since 1990. It has leased it as an office for several decades. Several years ago, Cobraspen transformed the villa into 6 luxury apartments. One of them is located in the basement, three meters below ground level. About that apartment, Cobraspen's website reports that it is a full-fledged home for which the basement was substantially excavated. The garden was also excavated to create a ground-level terrace in front of the house. Thus, neither cost nor effort was spared. Nevertheless, dissolution followed and the apartment was the focus of this lawsuit.<\/p>\n The buyers had a structural survey done prior to delivery. This found no elevated moisture levels. However, the quality of the foundation and measures against rising damp could not be assessed. The buyers asked the seller for information about this, but he indicated that no further investigation was necessary because \u2018there is no doubt whatsoever that everything meets the standards\u2019. For the buyers this is sufficient information and they proceed to purchase the house.<\/p>\n After delivery, things go wrong. Leaks develop in several places in the house. On behalf of both the buyers and the VvE<\/a> of Villa Rodesteijn, further investigations are being carried out. These show that the house is not waterproof, that there is rising and leaking moisture and that this will only worsen in the coming years. It is also concluded that the facades and partition walls do not meet the Building Works Environment Decree<\/a> which describes that moisture from outside must be kept out. This standard, according to the experts, is even\u00a0\u201cby no means satisfied.\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n The buyer therefore dissolves the purchase agreement. The court goes along with this. The buyer was entitled to expect that the house could be lived in. Given the severity of the flooding, this is not possible: there is moisture in the walls throughout the house and almost all of the facades and walls are not watertight. Also considering that the villa was converted into luxury residential apartments by a professional party like Cobraspen, buyers did not have to expect these defects. Therefore, there is non-conformity<\/a>. The dissolution of the sales contract<\/a> succeeds thus.<\/p>\n It is further argued by the seller that the seller did not know about the leaks either. Therefore, there would be no breach of the duty of disclosure. The court gave short shrift to this defense. For non-conformity it is not relevant whether the seller knew about the defect. Nor is it relevant whether the duty of disclosure was violated. The court refers to a Supreme Court ruling from 2020 (ECLI:NL:HR:2020:2003<\/a>).<\/p>\n Because the sale is dissolved after delivery<\/a>, that delivery must be undone. In another blog, I will discuss that this does put a (small?) kink in the works. The declaration for right<\/a> Indeed, that the purchase agreement was rescinded is not enforceable<\/a>. The purchaser must have the appeal<\/a> so wait and see. That could possibly have been overcome. The blog on that can be found here. In a third blog about this ruling, I discuss how the judge dealt with the damages claimed by the buyers. You can find that blog here. Are you a buyer or seller dealing with a similar issue? Then please contact<\/a> with the real estate specialist at Lexys Lawyers.<\/p>\nVilla Rodesteijn transformed into 6 luxury apartments<\/h2>\n
Building survey for and duty of disclosure by seller<\/h2>\n
Leakage in home after delivery<\/h2>\n
Waterlogged home leads to nonconformity<\/h2>\n
Defense: seller also did not know about leakage<\/h2>\n
Lawyer at rescission of purchase agreement<\/h2>\n
What to do if there is a leak in your new home<\/strong><\/h2>\n