Beware of Spring Break Rental Fraud

Trey Wilson San Antonio Texas Real Estate Attorney, Trey Wilson Real Estate Lawyer in San Antonio wrote:

From Fraud.org, here's an interesting warning of Spring Break rental and other vacation scams that target students. In past years, we have heard of such scams being publicized through Craigslist and other websites.

This year, I heard a radio report of a scammer who went so far as to set-up a fake website to book "reservations" and take advance payments. Of course, the condos for which the reservations were made do not exist or were not affiliated with the scammers.  A similar fraud employing fake bookings was reported on the Today Show.

Spring break scams plaguing students

Spring is officially here! But with temperatures across the country still in winter-like digits, what better reason to look forward to spring break escapes! Still recovering from the Great Recession and feeling the pinch of the ever-increasing cost of higher education, many students will be looking for deals as they make their spring break travel plans.

Scammers are keenly aware of this and are advertising custom-tailored schemes to defraud this vulnerable group. Police in many tourist areas, meanwhile, are often so busy trying to perform their normal duties while maintaining order during the often wild spring break period that they cannot track down all fraudsters, who may keep under the radar by swindling a relatively small amount of money compared to other criminals. Knowing that this lowers the chance of being caught, scammers have become increasingly bold.

Indeed, local media organizations and business groups across the country are warning students of this widespread fraud. In general, these notices caution of any offer that seems too good to be true. The reports show that these scams come in many different forms, from offers that promise vacation packages for far less than other companies, to misleading information on what accommodations a hostel has, to travel packages that seem to include flight or hotel reservations but really only offer something unrelated, and worth quite less. The list goes on and on.

Thankfully, there are ways for students and other consumers to protect themselves. Here are some guidelines students should consider before booking.

• Proceed with caution when considering deals that seem to offer a lot (five-star hotels, premium airfare, etc.) for a very low price or that require immediate payment to retain a rate. When something seems too good to be true, it generally is.
• Ensure that all details from the purchase are in writing, including the total cost, any restrictions that may apply, and the exact names of the hotels or airlines promised (if applicable).
• Be wary of any claims that say you “won” something, especially if the offer is unsolicited.
• Pay for the vacation with a credit card so you are protected if something goes wrong, and so authorities can more easily track the fraudulent vender. In fact, try to avoid companies that require payments by only cash, check, or wire transfer.
• Go online to see if the company has an established reputation. Look to see if other consumers have complained of hidden fees or sudden price increases.
• If a third party company claims to have purchased airline tickets or hotel reservations, call the companies yourself to ensure that the claim is valid. Some consumers have traveled long distances only to find that the hotel they thought they were staying at does not exist.

Sued by Buyer for Failure to Disclose Alleged Property Defect? Their Pre-Sale Inspection May Save You

San Antonio Texas Real Estate Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Sometimes buyers discover issues, problems or defects in real property after closing a purchase/sale. When these problems prove serious or costly to repair (or when good ole' Buyer's Remorse rears its head) buyers frequently file suit against the seller/former property owner.  

The usual allegations are that the Seller is liable for damages based on "failure to disclose," "misrepresentation by non-disclosure," fraud, breach of contract and/or violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act ("DTPA").  Suits are most common when the Seller's written disclosure does not identify the alleged property defect.

However, in many instances, a Buyer's pre-closing inspection (preformed by a third-party inspector) may absolve the Seller from liability.  This is particularly true when the third party inspector is retained by the Seller, conducts a thorough inspection, and has a reasonable opportunity to discover the alleged defect.  Whether or not the defect is actually discovered is often immaterial.

The law requires a Buyer seeking to recover from a Seller's non-disclosure to prove that he or she relied on a misrepresentation (including by failure to disclose) of the Seller in consummating the purchase. Eagle Props., Ltd. v. Scharbauer, 807 S.W.2d 714, 723 (Tex. 1990).  However, a line of court cases establishes that, in the eyes of the law,  a buyer's inspection of a house's condition may constitute a new and independent basis for the purchase of the property, which intervened and superseded the seller's alleged misrepresentation. "The common thread of the decisions reaching this conclusion is that, regardless of the result of his investigation, the buyer's decision to undertake such an investigation indicates that he or she is not relying on the seller's  representations about the property." Bartlett v. Schmidt, 33 S.W.3d 35, 38 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2000, pet. denied).

Texas courts have held that -- even when false and fraudulent representations are made concerning the subject matter of a contract -- when the person to whom they are made conducts an independent investigation into the matters covered by the representations before closing, it is presumed that reliance is placed on the information acquired by such investigation and not on the representations made to him.  Marcus v. Kinabrew, 438 S.W.2d 431, 432 (Tex. Civ. App.-Tyler 1969, no writ); see also Kolb v. Tex. Emprs' Ins. Ass'n, 585 S.W.2d 870, 872 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Lone Star Mach. Corp. v. Frankel, 564 S.W.2d 135, 138 (Tex. Civ. App.-Beaumont 1978, no writ); M.L. Mayfield Petroleum Corp. v. Kelly, 450 S.W.2d 104, 109-10 (Tex. Civ. App.-Tyler 1970, writ ref'd n.r.e.).   

Thus, when faced with a claim for failure to disclose a condition of real property formerly owned by them, a prudent response is to seek out the Buyer's property inspection and call an experienced real estate lawyer.  With a little luck and a well-presented defense, many times a pre-sale inspection may save you from liability.