A moth infestation in a Notting Hill mansion is at the centre of a multi-million pound lawsuit.
Iya Patarkatsishvili, the daughter of a billionaire Oligarch, and her dentist husband, Dr Yevhen Hunyak, bought the west London property in May 2019 for £32.6 million.
But they are now in the High Court with a £9.6 million claim against the previous owner, former rower William Woodward-Fisher, as they say a moth infestation has ruined their lives in the home; one which wasn’t flagged by the seller.
The couple say the moths have destroyed their clothes, and would land on their toothbrushes, food and glasses of wine; Dr Hunyak claimed he’s still killing up to 35 moths a day.
They say the moths have nested in the wool insulation embedded behind the wall and ceilings, and this would need to be taken out at a cost of £9.6 million. Woodward-Fisher has rejected this, saying the repair bill would be £162,652.
But the couple say he was guilty of ‘fraudulent misrepresentation’ or negligent in failing to disclose previous moth issues when they had pre-sale enquiries about ‘vermin’ in the house. And this is causing them to insist that the claim should involve Woodward-Fisher buying back the property and compensating them for what has happened, to the total tune of over £36 million.
The key issue is whether moths are classed as vermin, which the couple says didn’t happen when they made their enquiries, but should have been. Woodward-Fisher said he had previous problems with moths but was told that they were not classed as vermin. He denies all claims, saying he accurately and honestly responded to all enquiries and all moth problems had been eliminated by the time of the move, as far as he knew.
The issue that this brings up is seller responsibility in flagging issues to prospective buyers. It seems that the onus often lies with the buyer to make enquires.
“Caveat emptor comes to mind,” says Jeremy Leaf, north London estate agent and a former RICS residential chairman, with regards to the Notting Hill house. ‘Caveat emptor’ being the Latin phrase meaning “let the buyer beware” and a part of contract law which means buyer’s have responsibility for due diligence before purchase.
“It is generally incumbent upon the buyer to make enquiries of the seller about the property and its use over the period of their ownership before committing to the purchase,” says Leaf, “In this instance, it seems the sellers did highlight the problem but the case will probably turn on what was said in that reply. If a false statement was made, then the buyer could prevail.”
“We don’t know what type of survey or valuation report was carried out by the buyer and, if so, whether the surveyor was asked to advise on the problem.”
One of the main issues on the seller responsibility side will be the insulation issue.
“From the seller’s point of view, there is usually an additional duty of care to ensure works are carried out to a sufficiently high standard when refurbishment or new work is undertaken,” says Leaf, “If a job has been done negligently then perhaps action can be brought against the relevant contractor.
“However, another important point to consider is damage to the reputation of the builder/developer when it comes to selling other properties in future.”
As for moths being such a major issue – something else for Londoners to worry about – it is certainly a new one on Leaf:
“We come across many types of insect and animal issues, such as rats, mice, wasps, bees, birds and even bats when marketing property but have not previously come across moth infestations.”
