Moths and Misrepresentations When Selling a Property

When selling a property, there is a common law principle known as caveat emptor which places responsibility on a buyer to properly investigate a property before purchasing, and there is no general responsibility for the seller to disclose physical problems with a property.

However, a rather interesting recent case in the Supreme Court scrutinised this principle.

On 10 February 2025, the High Court ruled in favour of a couple who had purchased a property with quite a peculiar problem; the property was infested with moths. The buyers alleged that the seller had made misrepresentations in the pre-contract enquiries, which induced them to purchase the property.

The property was renovated by the seller in 2012, during which the seller installed wool-based insulation in the internal walls of the property. Shortly after this, the seller noticed that there was a problem with moths at the property, and a pest control company was instructed who advised that the insulation should be removed.

The property was subsequently put on the market for sale. As part of the pre-contractual enquiries, the seller was asked the standard question of ‘has the property ever been affected by vermin infestation?’. The seller failed to disclose the moth infestation or the report prepared by the pest control company and decided to rely on the ‘buyer beware’ principle that governs property transactions.

The buyers purchased the property in May 2019 for £32.5 million and quickly discovered the moth infestation. The buyers tried many solutions to deal with the moths, and even suffered damage to their clothing. Despite various attempts to eradicate the moths, the buyers struggled to keep on top of the infestation. It was at this point that the buyers discovered that the seller had previously instructed a pest control company to arrange for treatment for a moth-related issue at the property prior to their purchase.

The Court concluded that the seller had knowingly made false statements which amounted to misrepresentation.  As a result, the Court rescinded the sale contract, and the buyer was entitled to the return of the purchase price in addition to damages.   

This case highlights that a seller cannot rely on the ‘buyer beware’ principle if a failure to disclose would make information given to a buyer misleading or incomplete.

It is important that, as a seller, you carefully read and think about every response given when selling a property. If information given is incomplete, false or can be interpreted as misleading, then you could find yourself liable for a claim.

BHW regularly act for sellers for both residential and commercial properties, if you would like to get in touch regarding selling your property, then please contact either the Commercial Property team or Residential Property team on 0116 289 7000.