一般的买卖合约上写着 "Warranties : attached goods and included unattached goods are in NORMAL working order and are free and clear of all encumbrances" 5 F- y# A( G) t c- w: k: Z5 J+ L1 L. D7 C0 O6 i- x) e
新屋住在 Small claim court 上写着 "...Atco send employee to inspect the furnace.. informed that furnace was not up to code and order us to replace furnace" , |" A! q8 Z3 D" D, i2 q+ ^ # z9 b3 N! _" K# F1 X1 P3 r# c想问一下, 为何Atco 说 not up to code, order to replace ?6 v! Y7 R' p( i) O
% o/ t2 A% q$ R7 j% hWhat is the definition of "not up to code"
, P6 D4 ^/ z2 n; {4 H0 C% e对啊, 偶现在就义务帮朋友。奉陪到底, 到法院去。 第一被告列朋友为3rd party. 现在的argument 就是说 Seller does not oblige to Atco code compliance as it changes from time to time. 另外一个疑点是Caveat emptor applies. 在卖房子时,卖家已经offer 买家 get own inspection, to put in condition on contract 但是第一被告refused. 同时, 告人的买家也同时refused 了这等权利。