Who is responsible for disclosing wetlands information in a property sale?

Full question:

Seller checked 'Unknown' to question: 'Is the property located in a Wetlands or FEMA Flood Zone?' After (30) days of moving in the house, I had U.S. Army Corps of Engr. at my property to tell me there was 'consistent soil and plants with Wetland Life...pull the deed on the property.' I pulled the deed alright and it 'clearly' stated 'existing wetlands, proposed drainage easement'. I met with the Seller's Broker and identified what I found and he said, 'You need to discuss that with your Agent.' I stated to him, 'Well, as I see it, it's BOTH Agent's responsibilities to disclose this...and the fact I hired a Real Estate Atty that didn't disclose this either especially when the Atty. SPECIALIZES in Real Estate and Environmental Law?' This matter is only (5) months old....who is negligent? Who bears the responsibility for non-disclosure and INTENTIONALLY checking 'unknown' on the Wetlands question when Real Estate Agents didn't pull the Court Records (Deeds) to answer the question Yes-No on the Wetlands question. The Seller's Broker told me, 'We don't pull the Deeds on every property we sell....' OK, so WHY? His answer was, Because sometimes there's no record on file with the courthouse. I told him...'Well, the property is only (6) yrs. old and the deed was recorded on file back in 2004 when the house was built because the previous homeowner showed me her Deed-Land Survey and it clearly says, 'existing wetlands'. His comment, 'Well...I'm sure our Atty can address that.' Really? How can the Seller's Atty. address that when the Seller NEVER pulled the Deed BEFORE the sale and intentionally checked 'unknown' on Wetlands when the Deed was on file? Does this constitute Real Estate Fraud?

• Category: Real Property
• Subcategory: Fraud
• Date: 04/07/2025
• State: Pennsylvania

Answer:

Determining negligence and responsibility in this situation will depend on the specific facts and circumstances involved. A court may find that the seller should have known about the wetlands, either through the deed or prior disclosures. It's also possible that the "unknown" checkbox could impose a duty on you to investigate further. Typically, a title company is engaged to conduct a title examination or provide title insurance. Negligence is judged based on how a "reasonable person" would act in similar circumstances, and local industry practices may be considered. To prove fraud, it must be shown that a person intentionally withheld information they knew to be true. Fraud is defined as an intentional misrepresentation of a material fact made to induce another person to act, resulting in injury or damage. Fraud can also occur through omission, where failing to disclose material facts misleads other statements. For a claim of fraud, the misrepresentation or omission must relate to an existing fact, not a future promise, unless the person making the promise had no intent to fulfill it. The false statement or omission must be significant to the decision-making process. Additionally, it must be shown that the plaintiff's reliance on the misrepresentation was justifiable and that they could not have discovered the truth through reasonable inquiry. To establish fraud, it must be proven that the misrepresentation or omission was made knowingly and intentionally, not by mistake or negligence. The plaintiff must also demonstrate that they relied on the misrepresentation and suffered damages as a result. Damages may include punitive damages as a punishment for the fraudulent behavior. Relevant Pennsylvania statutes include: - § 35.282, which prohibits licensees from giving misleading advice or being part of false representations in real estate transactions. - § 35.312, which outlines the duties of a seller's agent, including the obligation to disclose known material defects.