An accountant from Surrey, Mi Suk Park, is embroiled in a legal battle regarding the purchase of a £1.5 million luxury flat designed by Versace in the 50-storey Aykon London One tower, situated in Nine Elms, London. Park, 54, made the sizable investment with the expectation that the flat would serve as her and her husband’s primary residence until retirement. After paying a £381,000 deposit in November 2015, her anticipation was rooted in promotional materials and plans that she believed guaranteed a high-standard living space.

In her lawsuit, Park claims that the final product differed significantly from the promised specifications. Upon inspection of the completed flat, she observed that one bedroom was smaller than anticipated, one of the two bathrooms lacked a bathtub, and an intrusive utility cupboard altered what she had envisioned as an open-plan living area. Furthermore, she faced a two-year delay in the apartment’s completion, with it finally being ready in 2022, well after she had sold her previous home in 2019 to facilitate the move.

Park’s legal representative, Nazar Mohammad, argued before the Central London County Court that the discrepancies between the promised features and the delivered apartment constitute “irredeemable breaches” of their purchase agreement. He elaborated, stating, “The flat was meant to be ready to move into in 2020… On delivery of the apartment, the claimant refused to complete the purchase as the apartment was materially and manifestly different.” He has described the promotional brochure as having raised expectations by asserting that life at Aykon Nine Elms would represent “the ultimate in luxury,” a standard he contends was not met.

Conversely, developers Nine Elms Property Ltd, a Jersey-based company owned by a Dubai parent firm, are countering Park’s claims. They argue that the brochure displayed layouts for illustrative purposes only and was labelled with clear indications that they showcased “typical layouts.” During cross-examination, Rupert Cohen, representing the developers, pointed to the terminology in the marketing materials and stated that Park’s inability to discern the implications of the word “typical” highlights her mistakes in the transaction.

According to court documents, Park now seeks over £700,000 in damages, which includes her original deposit, compensation for five years’ rent, losses incurred from the sale of her previous home, and additional claims. Following her refusal to complete the purchase, the developers filed a counterclaim to declare that the contract had been terminated and her deposit forfeited.

As the case unfolds in court, the focus will remain on whether the developer adhered to the terms outlined in the contract and the extent to which the alterations in the apartment’s layout constitute a breach of those terms. The matter highlights ongoing disputes common in luxury property investments, particularly within high-profile developments where contracts and representations are scrutinised closely.

The judicial proceedings continue as both parties await a resolution to the claims put forth.

Source: Noah Wire Services