Facts: Brenda Arlene Spencer hired Daymond, a realtor from Sutton-Harrison Realty, to provide an opinion of value (OOV) on six parcels of farmland amid her divorce negotiations. The OOV valued the parcels at $1.4 million. Spencer later believed this valuation to be too low compared to a subsequent formal appraisal valuing the land at over $1.8 million and sued for negligence.
Issue: The core issue was whether Daymond and Sutton-Harrison Realty were negligent in providing an OOV that Spencer claimed undervalued her property, impacting her financial settlement in the divorce.
Court's Ruling: The Court of King's Bench of Manitoba found that Spencer received what she paid for with the OOV and did not establish negligence or damages. The court highlighted that the OOV was a rough estimate and that a reasonable consumer would understand the difference between an OOV and a formal appraisal. Therefore, the court dismissed the claim.
Costs/Damages Awarded: The plaintiff’s claim was dismissed with ordinary (tariff) costs, implying Spencer was not awarded damages, and the exact amount of costs to be paid was to be determined if parties could not agree.
