Köpte hus som saknar bygglov

[Anonym9]

Hej! I'm sorry for writing in English as it would be difficult for me to explain it clearly in Swedish.

We bought a house 2 years ago and we found out that there are no building permits. The house is older than 10 year so no actions from municipal can be made. The seller lied on the contract and we had no reason to suspect anything (due to also other factors)

Due to the fact that lack of building permits causes that the house value is lower and that means for us problems for any future building permits, we want to now seek for compensation from the sellers and sue them as they don't want to cooperate with us, saying that lack if building permit does not make any difference as we can use the house as it is.

So I have a question now, is it possible that the court could come to the conclusion that lack if building permits does not have any impact on the property and the seller would win?

I would really appreciate it any advice!

 

[Småbrukaren]

Hi, sorry for your situation. However you are mentioning that you had no reason to expect that there was no permits. But your case in in fact the very reason for you to expect that. Always check permits. It’s on the buyer.

 

[Anonym9]

Hi, sorry for your situation. However you are mentioning that you had no reason to expect that there was no permits. But your case in in fact the very reason for you to expect that. Always check permits. It’s on the buyer.

Hej!
Yes, you are right, I regret not checking that but when we bought the house we asked the broker if there is anything that we should check, they have never mentioned to check the history of building permits, what is also nit a common practice in Sweden to do.

By the law in Sweden, buyers have no obligation to check if there are building permits if the seller states that there are all the buildings permits. From the inspection that was done before we bought the house says that the house was never extended so we had no reason to suspect that nearly half of the house could not have a building permit.

 

[Småbrukaren]

Always expect the unexpected. If you asked for permits, did you get it in writing from the broker or the seller?

 

[Anonym9]

Hi, sorry for your situation. However you are mentioning that you had no reason to expect that there was no permits. But your case in in fact the very reason for you to expect that. Always check permits. It’s on the buyer.

 

[Dowser4711]

Ouch, that was a rather nasty surprise.

Building permits are actually not anything that you need to verify, you are allowed to assume that all necessary permits are in place or that the seller would inform you otherwise.
(Unlike most other things people try to claim as hidden defects that actually was part of their duty to investigate before the purchase.)

The price of the house is absolutely affected by this. But just the actual missing permit isn't any problem in according to current cases that have been tried in court.
So, a few questions:
Usually there is a standard text on the documents when you purchase the house where the seller states if all permits was in place. You state that the seller lied.
Did they claim that the permits was in order?
If so, that might give you a case to work with, based on their false claim.

Secondly, why did you realize this now, two years later?
Have you perhaps filed for some new permits that was rejected or have any other decision been made from the municipality related to the missing permit? That would be a good thing, since you can base your claim on that as well.

You can see more details here:
https://lawline.se/answers/har-koparen-av-fastighet-undersokningsplikt-gallande-bygglov

But there won't be a quick fix where you will get a lump-sum of money from the seller just for informing them about this.
I would suggest that you hire a lawyer that specializes in the subject and let them advice you on how to proceed with this. Would not be surprised if it will be both slow and expensive unless the seller is surprisingly honest.

 

[Dilato]

No, the court would not come to the conclusion that a lack of building permit is irrelevant since that greatly reduce the buyers ability to fully dispose/posess/utilise the property.

The seller also has a disclosure obligation to inform about such faults, otherwise the seller has in my opinion acted in bad faith.

The courts have also concluded that the "investigation duty" (undersökningsplikt) does not include building permits, a buyer can reasonably presuppose that a property has all needed permits.
https://www.alltomjuridik.se/nyhete...-undersokningsplikt-av-vad-som-ar-svartbygge/

 

[Anonym9]

Always expect the unexpected. If you asked for permits, did you get it in writing from the broker or the seller?

Yes, we have a questioner that was filled in by the buyers and part of the contract, where for the question "if there are all required building permits" they answered "yes".

 

[Småbrukaren]

Then you’ve done your part. Best of luck with your case!

 

[Dowser4711]

No, the court would not come to the conclusion that a lack of building permit is irrelevant since that greatly reduce the buyers ability to fully dispose/posess/utilise the property.

Not purely the lack of permit.
See https://lagen.nu/dom/nja/1997s629 where HD rejected a claim like that where the resoning was like this:

"Av det anförda följer att en tillämpning av 4 kap 18 § JB förutsätter att ett myndighetsbeslut föreligger vid köpet eller i nära anslutning till detta. Enbart det förhållandet att det brister i bygglovet innebär inte att rådighetsfel föreligger."

 

[Dowser4711]

Yes, we have a questioner that was filled in by the buyers and part of the contract, where for the question "if there are all required building permits" they answered "yes".

That is excellent, for you that is.

If you also have some ruling from the municipality related to your building the case will be easy to win.
(If you don't, I would file for a building permit for whatever related to the house just to get it rejected due to the lack of original building permits before you take this to court.)

 

[Anonym9]

Ouch, that was a rather nasty surprise.

Building permits are actually not anything that you need to verify, you are allowed to assume that all necessary permits are in place or that the seller would inform you otherwise.
(Unlike most other things people try to claim as hidden defects that actually was part of their duty to investigate before the purchase.)

The price of the house is absolutely affected by this. But just the actual missing permit isn't any problem in according to current cases that have been tried in court.
So, a few questions:
Usually there is a standard text on the documents when you purchase the house where the seller states if all permits was in place. You state that the seller lied.
Did they claim that the permits was in order?
If so, that might give you a case to work with, based on their false claim.

Secondly, why did you realize this now, two years later?
Have you perhaps filed for some new permits that was rejected or have any other decision been made from the municipality related to the missing permit? That would be a good thing, since you can base your claim on that as well.

You can see more details here:
[länk]

But there won't be a quick fix where you will get a lump-sum of money from the seller just for informing them about this.
I would suggest that you hire a lawyer that specializes in the subject and let them advice you on how to proceed with this. Would not be surprised if it will be both slow and expensive unless the seller is surprisingly honest.

Yes, we have a questioner attacked to the contract where they answered that all the building permits are in place. On the inspection report, that was done before buying the house, it says that the house was never extended, so we had no reason to suspect that nearly half of the house does not have a building permit.

We were thinking of doing changes to one of the building (that also does not have a building permit) a year ago and this is how we discovered that there are no building permits. We have not applied for any as kommun said that there are very low chances as the buildings are very much no even close to what is allowed according to detaljplan ‍♀️ kommun cannot do anything as there are more that 10 years old, but we will not get any new building permits for the current buildings.

 

[Anonym9]

No, the court would not come to the conclusion that a lack of building permit is irrelevant since that greatly reduce the buyers ability to fully dispose/posess/utilise the property.

The seller also has a disclosure obligation to inform about such faults, otherwise the seller has in my opinion acted in bad faith.

The courts have also concluded that the "investigation duty" (undersökningsplikt) does not include building permits, a buyer can reasonably presuppose that a property has all needed permits.
[länk]

Thank you! I really hope that as I know now that the sellers knew about it and can't imagine that anyone can say that svartbygge has no impact for us, specially when selling the house or any future changes to the house. Thanks!

 

[Anonym9]

That is excellent, for you that is.

If you also have some ruling from the municipality related to your building the case will be easy to win.
(If you don't, I would file for a building permit for whatever related to the house just to get it rejected due to the lack of original building permits before you take this to court.)

That's for the advice, I will take it into account!

 

[Anonym9]

Then you've done your part. Best of luck with your case!

Thank you!