In most cases, the non-conformity is manifested by the fact that the apartment does not correspond to what was agreed in the sales contract or other possible contractual terms. Breach of oral contractual terms can also constitute a breach of the agreement. In principle, the non-conformity under this provision does not require that it should have affected the transaction.
If the seller has failed to inform the buyer of any specific matter concerning the apartment of which it must be assumed that he was aware, the housing transaction may be defective. An additional condition is that the buyer could reasonably have expected to receive the information and that the non-disclosure can be presumed to have affected the transaction. When assessing the seller’s obligation to provide information, the possibility of the buyer discovering this fact during the inspection of the apartment and the seller’s awareness of the buyer’s specific requirements will be taken into account.
An apartment is defective if it does not correspond to the information provided by the seller on the apartment before the transaction, which can be assumed to have influenced the transaction. This is a provision on the seller’s obligation to disclose information. This provision applies to information given in marketing and in any other context, irrespective of the manner in which it was given. The apartment is defective if the incorrect information is provided by the seller himself or by his agent, such as a real estate agent. The seller must disclose on his own initiative any information which may influence the buyer’s decision to purchase. This information must be given, for example, if the apartment deviates from the normal standard or has defects that are not reasonably observable. If the seller is the manager or a member of the board of directors of a limited liability housing company, the obligation to disclose information is even more pronounced.
A apartment is also defective if its amenities, condition or other properties are significantly inferior to what the buyer could reasonably have expected. This assessment takes into account the price of the apartment, its age, the standard of amenities in the area, the general requirements for a reasonable standard of living and other factors. The seller can therefore be held liable under this provision even if he/she was not aware of the defect. This is known as a latent or hidden defect. However, the defect must always be significant.
The Housing Transactions Act also contains provisions on financial irregularity. This refers to situations where the seller has provided the buyer with erroneous or misleading information about the financial obligations or liabilities related to the ownership or use of the apartment concerned, and the given information can be assumed to have influenced the transaction. The information provided may concern maintenance fees or the portion of the property’ debt allocated to the shares sold, as well as the financial status of the limited liability housing company.
Financial irregularity also occurs when the seller fails to provide information that he must have known about and that the buyer could reasonably have expected to obtain, taking into account the possibility of the buyer acquiring the information during the prior inspection. It is also required that the failure can be presumed to have influenced the transaction.
A latent financial irregularity refers to a situation where the financial obligations related to the ownership or use of the apartment have turned out to be significantly higher than the buyer could reasonably have expected, due to an unexpected defect after the transaction.