Nairobi Developer Ordered to Refund Buyer Over Shoddy Apartment

The feud dates back to 2015, when the developer entered into an agreement with the purchasers of an apartment in a residential complex it was developing. The parties entered into a contract of sale dated April 23, 2015 for the purchase of the apartment, and it was agreed that the developer would expedite the construction of the estate project and the completion date would be 15 days after receipt of the architect’s certificate of completion.

The contract set the purchase price at Sh18,800,000, payable in instalments. At the time of signing the contract, the parties agreed to change the apartment from a four-bedroom apartment to a three-bedroom apartment. The buyers paid a total of Sh18,860,000 and made plans to inspect the apartment.

Upon inspection, the buyers found that there were several defects and uncompleted works.

The buyers then spent Sh489,490 to complete the property.

Court documents showed that the developer’s agents had initially refused to allow the buyers access or possession of the apartment and when they finally did so, it was not in a habitable condition.

The buyers said that there were water leaks in every bedroom and that the finish was not good as the developer had done a shoddy job which had been covered up with cement.

The buyers issued a completion notice to the developer but did not receive a response, prompting the court action, which sought a full refund of the purchase price, the cost of valuation and the price of fixtures.

Judge Mbeya said the buyers had proved a case of breach of contract against the developer.

“Upon reviewing the agreement, it is evident that clause one imposed an obligation on the defendant to ensure the construction of the 32 flats was carried out expeditiously. The agreement also outlined the mode of payment, which the plaintiffs duly adhered to,” the judge said.

“Regarding completion, the agreement stipulated that the project would be considered complete either 15 days after the vendor’s architect issued a certificate confirming the completion of the development or by 30/4/2015, whichever was later,” Justice Mabeya added.

The court said that the developer had not given any justifiable reasons for refusing to hand over the apartment to the buyers.

“Furthermore, as per clause 11 of the agreement, upon failure to complete the development and hand over possession, the defendant was obligated to compensate the plaintiffs by refunding all monies paid toward the purchase price,” the judge said.