They showed one house — they sold another
Why a Public Registry record is not enough and why you should hire a lawyer when purchasing real estate
What happened
In July 2024, our client visited a village in the Marneuli municipality to purchase a residential house through a real estate agent. The seller presented himself as the owner of a specific, two-story residential house, showed this very house from the outside on-site, and told the buyer that he was selling exactly this property.
During the viewing, the seller added that he would hand over the keys in 4—5 days after the conclusion of the contract — as if his family members were living in the house and it was necessary to move them to another residence. It was precisely this stipulation that ruled out the buyer receiving actual possession immediately upon the transaction, which would have allowed the substitution of the property to be discovered on the spot.
Convinced of the accuracy of the provided information, the buyer paid the full purchase price — 20,000 USD. The contract was signed in the presence of a notary, and the buyer was registered as the owner in the Public Registry. After this, the seller categorically refused to hand over the keys.
The first dispute and the unexpected discovery
The client filed a vindication lawsuit in court requesting the recovery of the property and the eviction of the respondent. By the decision of the Marneuli Magistrate Court, the lawsuit was satisfied, the decision entered into legal force, an enforcement writ was issued, and the case was transferred to the National Bureau of Enforcement. Despite this, the property was not vacated voluntarily.
The true picture only became clear after this. When on-site according to the cadastral code specified in the contract we identified the object, it was established that the subject of the contract was a completely different immovable property. The two-story house that was shown to the buyer on-site and presented for sale was never the subject of the transaction nor the property of the seller. In reality, the purchased object was located elsewhere and was effectively occupied by third parties.
Legal assessment
Such an action goes beyond the scope of a civil-legal dispute. The buyer was misled regarding an essential condition of the transaction — the identity of the subject of the sale; the error was deliberately maintained both before and after the conclusion of the transaction; and as a result, the buyer's monetary funds were obtained through deception. This is a classic composition of fraud.
Important: A civil judgment that has entered into legal force regarding the recovery of property does not exclude the criminal-legal assessment of the action — the subject of the civil dispute was the restoration of possession of the registered item, whereas the subject of the fraud is the illegal acquisition of monetary funds through the substitution of the object. On this basis, an application for the initiation of an investigation was submitted to the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
Legal grounds:
- Article 180 of the Criminal Code — Fraud
- Note to Article 177 of the Criminal Code — Large amount
- Articles 24 and 25 of the Criminal Code — Complicity
- Article 360 of the Criminal Code — Arbitrariness
- Civil Code — Owner's vindication claim for the return of property
What this case teaches us
In this case, the buyer did everything "by the book": there was an agent, there was a notary, there was registration in the Public Registry. Nevertheless, he lost $20,000 and to this day has not been able to enter either house. The reason is simple: Neither the agent, nor the notary, nor the registry verifies whether the house that was shown to you on-site is the subject of the contract.
The notary verifies the will of the parties and the form of the documents; the registry registers the cadastral code and not your perception. Verifying the identity of the object — that is, that the house seen and the house bought are one and the same — is solely the task of the buyer and their lawyer.
What you should do before purchasing property
- Verify the identity of the object on-site. Obtain an extract from the Public Registry and a cadastral map and ensure that the cadastral code specified in the contract corresponds exactly to the building you were shown — with coordinates, boundaries, and surrounding objects.
- Check who the actual owner is. The person showing you the house is not necessarily its owner.
- Demand immediate transfer of possession. The promise "I will give you the keys in a few days" is often not a matter of household convenience, but a way to buy time.
- Do not pay the full amount in advance. A portion of the price should be paid upon the actual receipt and inspection of the object.
- Document the inspection process. Photos and videos with dates, correspondence with the agent and the seller — this is exactly what became evidence in this case.
- Check who is actually occupying the object. Evicting a house occupied by third parties requires years and additional expenses.
- Bring in a lawyer before the transaction, not after it. If legal due diligence had been conducted before the transaction in this case, the substitution would have been revealed on the very first day.
Conclusion
Purchasing real estate is usually one of the biggest financial decisions in a person's life. A lawyer's fee is a small fraction of the value of such a transaction, while the cost of a mistake is the entire amount paid, years of litigation, and often, both the house and the money. Therefore, legal due diligence before signing a contract is not an unnecessary luxury — it is a part of the transaction.
If you are planning to purchase real estate, contact us before concluding the transaction — we will check the object, the seller's right, and the terms of the contract.
Pkhaladze & Partners | Pkhaladze et Associés — Law Firm
Tbilisi, 24g Al. Kazbegi Ave., AXIS Complex | www.pkhaladze-law.ge | +995 597 117 795
