assignment代写：房地产案例研究
房地产是一个庞大的行业，需要特定的立法来规范业主、代理人、金融家、债务人、银行家、买家、购买者和开发商的行为。该立法规定其行为应在精简的基础上进行，并避免缔约实体和个人之间的冲突减少。其中最重要的是过失侵权行为，这种侵权行为难以追踪，并可能对责任主体产生毁灭性的影响。本文将讨论过失侵权行为在不同情况下适用的两个案例研究，并将讨论其影响和相关结论。
案例研究1
如果买方在作出最终购买决定前知道损坏的屋顶信息，他可以向贷款人追究错误信息，并要求重新评估该物业，而不收取额外费用，因为测量员犯了疏忽职守的错误。买方必须证明测量员对贷款人负有义务，并间接证明买方有责任提供正确和完整的信息。买方还必须证明，测量员在其行动中存在疏忽，并没有将损坏的屋顶信息包括在报告中，该报告改变了该物业的估值，以及与之相关的所有金融交易。可以说，测量员对买方负有一项专业责任，即对该住宅物业进行全面、彻底的评估。买方应支付测量员估算的最终价格。不包括损坏屋顶信息的过失是一种侵权行为，应负责索赔。买方可以决定向贷方和鉴定人要求重新评估该物业，然后就购买事宜作出经过计算的决定。
买方可以决定不继续购买，除非测量员重新评估并决定重新估价。这包括测量员遗漏的损坏的屋顶。这是因为，如果买方已经知道将出现亏损，并将包括长期更大的经济损失，那么他有权维护自己的利益。测量员对贷方和买方负有一般专业注意义务。如果他没有包括损坏的屋顶信息，他要对过失侵权和给买方造成的损失负责。这里引用一个案例，Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) AC562，可以看出法官认为公司对其客户负有一般的注意义务和专业责任(lawgovpol.com, 2014)。尽管注意义务有些困难，但它不能成为受害者在物质和经济方面遭受巨大损失的借口。这表明检验员应对损坏负责。如果屋顶的评估是很难做的,他应该通知买方和银行报告的准备之前,所以它被认为是在住宅地产的估值和最小或没有经济损失买方和银行。由此可见，验船师玩忽职守，造成买方和贷款人一定程度上的经济损失，并对由此造成的损害承担责任。
assignment代写：房地产案例研究
Real estate is a large industry requiring specific legislation to regulate the conduct of property owners, agents, financiers, debtors, bankers, buyers, purchasers, and developers. The legislation regulates its conduct to be run on a streamlined basis and avoid less conflict between contracting entities and individuals. The most important is the tort of negligence which is difficult to trace and can have devastating impacts on the liable entity. This essay will discuss two case studies in which the tort of negligence is applicable under different circumstances, and will discuss the impacts and relevant conclusions.
Case study 1
In case the purchaser gets to know the damaged roof information before making a final decision about the purchase, he can pursue the misinformation to the lender and ask to reassess the property at no extra cost, because the surveyor has made a mistake of being negligent in his duty. The purchaser will have to prove that the surveyor owed a duty towards the lender and indirectly the purchaser was responsible to give correct and complete information. The purchaser will also have to prove that the surveyor was negligent in his action and did not include the damaged roof information in the report which changed the valuation of the property and all financial transactions attached to it. The surveyor can be said to owe a professional duty towards the purchaser–who were supposed to pay the final price valued by the surveyor– to have made a complete and thorough assessment of the residential property. The negligence of not including the damaged roof information is a tort and is liable to be claimed. The purchaser can decide to request a reassessment of the property to the lender and surveyor and then make a calculated decision about the purchase.
The purchaser can decide not to go ahead with the purchase unless the surveyor does a reassessment and decides to make a fresh valuation. It includes the damaged roof that had been missed by the surveyor to be included. This is because the purchaser has the right to safeguard his own interest if it is already known that it is going to be loss making and will include a bigger economic loss on a long term basis. The surveyor owes a general professional duty of care towards the lender and purchaser.If he has failed to include the damaged roof information, he is liable for the tort of negligence and the damages caused to the purchaser. To cite a case here, Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) AC562, it was seen that the judge held that there was a general duty of care and professional responsibility of the company towards their customers(lawgovpol.com, 2014). Even though the duty of care is somewhat difficult, it is not an excuse for the huge losses in physical and economic terms for the victim. This indicates that the surveyor is responsible for the damage. If the assessment of the roof was difficult to be done, he should have informed the purchaser and the lender before the preparation of the report, so that it is being considered in the valuation of the residential property and there is minimum or no economic loss to the purchaser and the lender. Thence, it is seen that the surveyor has been negligent towards his duty and has caused a situation which can cause economic loss to the purchasers and the lender to an extent and is liable for the damages caused.
