An accountant who purchased a luxury £1.5 million Versace-designed apartment in London is suing the developer after discovering several significant discrepancies between the property she purchased and what was promised to her.
Mi Suk Park, 54, made a deposit of £381,000 for a two-bedroom apartment in the Aykon London One tower, a prestigious building also known as the ‘Versace Tower’ in Nine Elms.
Promises of Luxury and Upsetting Discoveries
When Ms. Park initially made the purchase in 2015, she was promised ‘the ultimate in luxury,’ complete with a stunning floorplan and premium finishes.
The brochure and floorplans showed two bathrooms, each with a bathtub, and an open-plan living space.
The apartment was supposed to offer panoramic views of London, which perfectly matched the premium price tag of £1.5 million.
However, when Ms. Park visited the finished apartment in 2022, she was horrified to find that the flat was “materially and manifestly different” from what she had seen in the brochure and plans.
Discrepancies in Design and Size Lead to Legal Action
Among her grievances, Ms. Park found that one of the bathrooms lacked a bathtub, which was a key feature in the original layout.
She also discovered that one of the bedrooms was smaller than expected and that a utility cupboard intruded on what was supposed to be an open-plan living space.
These issues, along with a delay of two years in the completion of the apartment, led her to refuse to move in.
Now, she’s suing for over £700,000, seeking her £381,000 deposit, five years of rent, and compensation for the losses she incurred.
Developer Denies Misrepresentation and Countersues
The developer, Nine Elms Property Ltd, which is based in Jersey with a parent company in Dubai, denies the allegations.
They argue that the brochure was merely for illustrative purposes, describing the layout as a “typical” design.
They are also counter suing Ms. Park, claiming she forfeited her deposit by not completing the purchase.
Their lawyers assert that the changes in the layout of the apartment were acceptable and within the terms of the agreement.
Legal Battle Over Misrepresentation Claims
In court, Ms. Park’s lawyer, Nazar Mohammad, argued that the layout changes were “irreconcilable breaches” of the contract.
He pointed out that the brochure promised an apartment with the “ultimate in luxury,” yet the finished flat failed to live up to those high expectations. Ms. Park, who runs an accountancy business in Surrey, emphasized that this was a “lifetime decision” for her and her husband, intended to be their main home until retirement.
She had sold her previous home in 2019, preparing for the new apartment’s completion.
The Clash Over ‘Typical Layout’ and Legal Disputes
During the proceedings, the developers’ lawyer, Rupert Cohen, cross-examined Ms. Park, pointing out that the brochure included the term “typical layout,” which Ms. Park had overlooked.
Despite this, Ms. Park maintained that the structural elements shown in the brochure should have been final and fixed before the purchase.
The court will now decide if the developer acted within the terms of the contract and whether these discrepancies are enough to invalidate the agreement.
Ms. Park’s Demands for Compensation
Ms. Park is seeking to recover her £381,000 deposit, £131,000 in rent paid since 2020, and £150,000 in losses from selling her previous home.
She also claims additional losses of around £45,000.
The case continues, and the outcome will likely set a precedent for how much developers must adhere to promises made in brochures and sales agreements.
As this high-stakes legal battle unfolds, it raises important questions about consumer rights and the accuracy of marketing materials in the luxury property market.