this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2026
23 points (96.0% liked)

Canada

11951 readers
616 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are they claiming that the event has given the property a bad reputation that reduces its value by that amount? I suppose those are plausible grounds for a lawsuit. I can't think of any other way a death on the property several years ago could cause damage to the new owners. Surely they're not claiming that the house is haunted (and if that's the issue, I can imagine the judge being extremely unamused).

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would think it could be hard to convince someone that the property had a bad reputation while at the same time claiming that you didn't know about it. A "reputation" implies that it's common knowledge, or at the very least, that it's easy to find out about. Which means that if you didn't know about it, you didn't do your due diligence.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 week ago

My suspicion is that they didn't talk to the neighbours until after they bought the house. So, yeah, lack of due diligence.