[WSBARP] View blockage

Fri Apr 30 08:46:08 PDT 2021

Nuisance and fraud against sellers, although those are particularly difficult theories to prove.  SEPA, Shoreline violations if within shoreline jurisdiction, and the usual height restrictions in the zoning code against the local government.  Be on the lookout for a view protection overlay district; uncommon, but they do exist.  Also be aware that LUPA’s SOL is very short, and that you have to name everyone with a conceivable interest in the property if you go that route.  See RCW 36.70C.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Chris B
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 4:23 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] View blockage

I’ve got a couple responses mentioning the underlying facts, questions of proof, etc.... those are all legitimate and I will do my diligence before taking the case. 

However, I am more asking about the cause(s) of action, assuming the facts check out. Again, what I am told (but haven’t verified) is that the seller became aware of the development plan which would substantially block the “million dollar view”, and in fact sold their supposed dream house specifically because they learned what was coming (the lot being developed was sold in an off market deal and was generally presumed to be unbuildable.  The sale occurred before the development plans became public knowledge or before permits were applied for, but again I’m told the seller learned what was coming and sold for that very reason.

There was nothing on the “form 17” and that question about development affecting the property is no longer part of the form.

Christopher T. Benis 

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 29, 2021, at 4:16 PM, Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com <mailto:Bryce at dillelaw.com> > wrote:

If the seller knew of potential blockage  and that it was more than just a possibility and that view was a major selling point of property and advertised as such and it was not disclosed then I think it is actionable for rescission and maybe damages. What was on the form 17? How soon did seller put in on the marlet after seller became aware of view blockage in the future? I believe there is a King county case on this and relying on memory I think one of parties was Landover corp.

Bryce H. Dille

Dille Law, PLLC

2010 Caton Way SW Ste. 101

Olympia, WA 98502

Office: 360-350-0270

Cell: 253-579-5561

** Please note that I use the dictation feature of my iPhone and that sometimes everything I say does not get properly translated**

This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately. 

Business Entity Creation and Management, Business, Government and Tax Law, Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of Chris B
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 2:36 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> 
Subject: [WSBARP] View blockage

Anyone have latest insights into viability of claims for a seller’s failure to disclose to buyer their knowledge of adjacent development that will block the “million dollar view?”

Please note our new website and email address as of 1/1/21.

Chris Benis

First Avenue Law Group, PLLC

321 First Avenue West, Seattle, WA  98119

206.447-1900 office – 206.447.9075 fax – www. firstavenuelaw.com  

This message contains information that may be CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED.  Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message.  If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail chrisb at firstavenuelaw.com <mailto:chrisb at firstavenuelaw.com> , and delete this message. Thank you very much.

To comply with recent IRS rules, we must inform you that this message, if it contains advice relating to federal taxes, was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law.  Under recent IRS rules, a taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if that advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements under federal law.  Please contact me if you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to these new rules.

***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com> 
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20210430/d97fac00/attachment.html>