Descriptions such as "immaculate" or "pristine" in property advertisements hold no guarantees.

This is the warning from Property24's legal expert, Lucille Geldenhuys, from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch.

Even though it may appear in print, these words cannot pass as the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" – although we may sometimes choose to believe so.

The wording in advertisements are often chosen to enhance the appeal of the item for sale and therefore to grab readers' attention.

Embroidered words test the boundaries between fact and fiction and could turn out to be nothing but a cheap shot at herding prospective buyers.

The result is that people may feel frustrated or misled upon viewing such properties.

Fact is, advertisements give no guarantees regarding the property itself and the onus always rests on the buyer to make an informed decision.

To this end, the sale agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties, including guarantees given by the seller regarding the property.

Should it later appear that the property is not in the condition guaranteed by the seller, the buyer will have a legally enforceable claim against the seller to make the necessary repairs to the property.

But the buyer cannot depend on an advertisement in support of a claim of misrepresentation by a seller. Misrepresentation in print advertisements often relates to patent and latent defects – a patent defect being one that is clearly visible and the latter one that is not.

The seller may, of course, not conceal defects. In terms of our common law, there is an implied term in a contract of sale that the seller warrants to the purchaser that there are no latent defects in the property.

If it appears that a latent defect exists after the parties have signed the agreement, the seller is liable for the defect irrespective of whether he or she knew about it.

In order to avert this burden on the seller, it has become standard practice to include a "voetstoots" clause – which states the property is bought in its current state – in sale agreements.

In this instance the seller will be protected by the clause should defects manifest themselves after the sale. But if the seller deliberately concealed them, he or she cannot hide behind this clause.

"It is undeniable that advertising is one of the most important pillars of this industry, but my advice is to take them with a pinch of salt, otherwise you might be left with a sour taste in your mouth!"

Readers' Comments
Have a comment about this article? Email us now..

As an estate agent I wish to point out that:

A purchaser has three years from purchasing/occupation of the property bought to hold the seller responsible for defects to the property whether these defects have been revealed to the purchaser or not. Sellers tend to hide behind the voetstoets clause believing this will protect them no matter what. This is not so. Let me give an example. My sister and brother in law purchased a property and on occupying same found that:

1) the swimming pool motor did not work.
2) the sewerage was faulty and sewerage was seeping up from the pipes into the garden. The problem was caused by the roots of a large tree breaking the pipe.

On encountering the problem they believed that they had no recourse due to the voetstoets clause but I drew attention to the three-year defect period. I advised that they contact the agent they dealt with but the agent was not interested – "you bought voetstoets". The same was told to them by the attorney attending to the transfer. On my advice they consulted with their own attorney who told them the same thing.

I photocopied, from The South African Property and the Law - a reference manual written by Professor Henk Delport used by all estate agents and lawyers - the relevant information which I then faxed to my sister. They presented the faxed information to their attorney who then took up the matter which was eventually settled out of court.

An important factor in a situation such as this is that the sooner a matter such as this is attended to the better as it is easier to prove that the defect was in existence during the ownership of the seller. The voetstoets clause will protect the seller in instances where defects are visible or declared and it makes sense to record these in the contract. For those dishonest sellers who think they will get away with expensive repairs by not declaring defects, take note, you can be held accountable - FOR UP TO 3 YEARS!!! - Ethne

Property News
Click here for more property news articles.

Need a blog?
Start your own blog with a free blog from 24.com.