Final answer:
Todd committed a breach of contract by misrepresenting the condition of the roof. The agreement between Linda and Todd is a voidable contract for the sale of real estate. Linda has the option to proceed with the purchase, negotiate for a lower price, or rescind the contract.
Step-by-step explanation:
Todd committed a breach of contract. He stated that the roof was in good condition and had a remaining lifespan of 25 years, when in fact it had a leak and required $35,000 in damage costs. This constitutes a misrepresentation of the condition of the property, which is a breach of the seller's duty to disclose material facts.
This agreement between Linda and Todd would be considered a contract for the sale of real estate. However, due to Todd's misrepresentation, the contract would be considered voidable. Linda has the option to either go ahead with the purchase, negotiate for a lower price to account for the cost of repairing the roof, or rescind the contract and walk away from the purchase.
It is important for buyers to conduct thorough inspections and demand full transparency from sellers before entering into any real estate agreement to avoid potential misrepresentations or hidden defects.
Linda is negotiating to buy Tod's house and has been told that the roof is in good condition and relatively new. However, upon discovering a leak and significant damage necessitating $35,000 in repairs, Tod may have committed misrepresentation if he knowingly provided false information or failed to disclose known defects. The contract between Linda and Tod could be affected by this as it might be considered voidable if Linda decides she was induced into the contract based on incorrect information about the house. Linda's options may include negotiating with Tod for a lower purchase price, requesting Tod to undertake the repairs, withdrawing from the purchase, or seeking legal actions, such as suing for damages or for the rescission of the contract.