Patarkatsishvili v Woodward-Fisher [2025] — TA6 disclosure for UK sellers

Written and reviewed by the South Yorkshire Property Buyers team (a trading name of Bullseye Properties Ltd, company 14869608, previously Lord CNB Properties Ltd until 18 April 2024). Published 17 May 2026 · Last reviewed: 2 June 2026.

The case in 60 seconds

In 2019 the Patarkatsishvili family (the buyers) paid £32.5 million for a Notting Hill mansion in Horbury Crescent owned by Iya Patarkatsishvili and her husband William Woodward-Fisher. Within weeks of moving in they noticed moths everywhere — in clothes, in soft furnishings, falling out of insulation. Specialist investigation revealed that the natural-wool insulation in the loft and cavities was riddled with a clothes-moth infestation that had been a known problem to the sellers for over two years before completion.

The seller's TA6 Property Information Form — the Law Society standard pre-contract document — included questions about vermin, hidden defects and reports about the property. She had answered them "No" or "Not Known". In fact she held two pest control reports and a lengthy email trail with specialists discussing wholesale replacement of the insulation.

On 10 February 2025 Mr Justice Fancourt found that those answers were fraudulent misrepresentations under the Misrepresentation Act 1967. He rescinded the contract, ordered repayment of the £32.5m purchase price plus interest, and ordered the buyers to transfer the property back to the seller. Even though they had bought four and a half years earlier, section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 — the discovery rule for fraud — meant the claim was in time.

It is the highest-value rescission for property misrepresentation in modern English legal history. And the principles run all the way down to a £150,000 terrace.

Why this case matters to every UK seller — not just the mega-rich

The natural reaction to a £32.5m mansion case is to assume it has nothing to do with ordinary homeowners. That instinct is wrong. The judgment turns on three legal mechanisms that apply to every domestic property sale in England and Wales:

1. The Misrepresentation Act 1967 — applies to every contract, including the TR1 transfer of a freehold house.
2. The TA6 Property Information Form — used in over 95% of residential transactions handled by solicitors and licensed conveyancers in England and Wales.
3. Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 — postpones the six-year limitation period until the buyer discovers (or could reasonably have discovered) the fraud.

Combined, they mean a seller who deliberately conceals a known issue on TA6 — whether moths, knotweed, subsidence, a damp problem, a noisy neighbour or an unauthorised extension — carries that risk indefinitely. A £30 question on a £180,000 terrace in Sheffield can unwind the whole deal years later, with the buyer entitled to the price back plus interest.

What TA6 actually is — and the 2025 update

TA6 is the standard pre-contract Property Information Form published by the Law Society. The seller answers around 20 sections of questions about the property and signs to confirm the answers are correct to the best of their knowledge. The buyer's solicitor sends the completed form across as part of the contract pack, and the buyer relies on those answers when deciding whether to proceed.

The current edition is TA6 (5th edition, 2024) with the March 2025 update, designed to dovetail with the disclosure requirements of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC Act). The Law Society added and reworded questions covering material information that estate agents and portals must now publish under the DMCC regime.

The questions most often litigated are:

• Q2 — Disputes and complaints. Any disputes or complaints with neighbours, or any anti-social behaviour you have raised or been notified of.
• Q4 — Notices. Any notices that affect the property — planning, enforcement, party wall, listed building, neighbour development.
• Q7 — Environmental matters. Includes flooding (Q7.1–7.5), radon (Q7.7) and Japanese knotweed (Q7.8).
• Q9 — Alterations, planning and Building Regulations. Any work done since you bought, with permissions and certificates.
• Q11 — Occupiers. Adults living in the property who are not party to the sale.
• Q13 — Connection to utilities and services. Updated post-DMCC.

For each question there is usually a tick-box for "Yes", "No" or "Not Known". The Patarkatsishvili judgment confirms that ticking "Not Known" is itself a representation — specifically, that you do not have the relevant knowledge. If you do, "Not Known" is a lie.

The judge's reasoning — five points every seller should understand

1. "Not Known" is a positive representation, not a get-out

Fancourt J held that "Not Known" represents that the seller has made reasonable enquiries within their own knowledge and the answer is genuinely unknown to them. Where, as here, the seller had reports and correspondence in their own files, "Not Known" was a misrepresentation of their actual state of knowledge.

2. Knowledge of the seller's spouse can be imputed

Mr Woodward-Fisher had handled most of the moth correspondence. His wife was named as the signing seller. The judge found her aware of the issue and held the answer was hers as the contracting party. For ordinary sellers this means a couple cannot ringfence knowledge by having one spouse sign — both heads are treated as one for disclosure purposes.

3. Fraud unlocks rescission even years later

Under section 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act the court has a discretion to award damages instead of rescission for non-fraudulent misstatements. For fraud, rescission is available as of right. Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 postpones the limitation clock until the fraud is discovered. The Patarkatsishvilis discovered the scale of the problem in 2020 and sued in 2023 — well within the six-year window from discovery.

4. The remedy was full unwind plus interest

The judge ordered repayment of £32.5m plus interest, a credit to the sellers for the buyers' use and occupation of the house, and the buyers to retransfer. He also ordered consequential damages including stamp duty land tax — over £3.4m of SDLT — and remediation, professional fees and removal costs. Total exposure: well in excess of £36m.

5. The standard pack of seller protections did not save them

The contract included the Standard Conditions of Sale, which try to exclude liability for misrepresentation. Section 3 of the Misrepresentation Act 1967, read with the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (or the Consumer Rights Act 2015 for consumer-to-consumer sales), means a contract term cannot exclude liability for fraudulent misrepresentation. The standard "no reliance" clauses were ineffective against the fraud finding.

The 2026 disclosure stack: TA6 + DMCC Act + RICS

UK sellers in 2026 sit at the intersection of three overlapping disclosure regimes. Knowing which applies and when is essential.

Regime	When it bites	Penalty
DMCC Act 2024 (from 6 April 2025)	Marketing stage — listings, portals, brochures. Omission of material information.	Civil fines up to 10% of turnover or £300k; criminal liability for traders.
TA6 + Misrepresentation Act 1967	Pre-contract pack. Untrue answers to TA6 questions.	Rescission (fraud) or damages (negligence/innocence).
RICS Home Survey Standard (effective 2021, updated 2024)	Surveyor's report to the buyer — not direct seller liability but informs buyer claims.	Buyer can use survey to evidence what seller should have known.
Caveat emptor (common law)	Default rule: buyer beware. Increasingly hollowed out by the regimes above.	No remedy unless one of the other regimes is engaged.

The practical upshot in 2026 is that "caveat emptor" no longer protects a seller in any meaningful way. If you know it, disclose it — on the listing, on TA6, in writing.

The big six disclosure landmines after Patarkatsishvili

1. Japanese knotweed — TA6 Q7.8

Japanese knotweed is the highest-litigation disclosure item in the UK. DEFRA guidance treats it as controlled waste, and an active rhizome system can devalue a property by 5–20%. RICS updated its 2022 guidance to emphasise that proximity (within 3 metres) and management plans matter as much as presence. The Court of Appeal's 2024 decision in Davies v Bridgend County Borough Council [2024] EWCA Civ 80 confirmed that diminution-in-value claims for past encroachment are recoverable.

On TA6 you must say "Yes" if knotweed is present or you have reasonable grounds to believe it is. Hiding it is the textbook Patarkatsishvili scenario. Full deep guide: selling a house with Japanese knotweed.

2. Subsidence, heave and structural movement

Q5 of TA6 covers structural problems, subsidence and underpinning. Even a historic subsidence claim — repaired and certified — must be disclosed. Buyers' insurers ask the question, mortgage lenders ask the question, and any concealment is the kind of fraud that survives the limitation period.

3. Neighbour disputes — TA6 Q2

This is the second most litigated TA6 line after knotweed. Anti-social behaviour, boundary arguments, noise complaints, parking rows, formal letters from a neighbour — all are disputes. The Land Registry has no record of them, so the only way a buyer learns is via TA6 or post-completion. Concealment is almost always fraud.

4. Planning breaches and unauthorised works — TA6 Q9

An extension built without planning permission. A loft conversion without Building Regulations sign-off. A wall removed without a structural engineer. Each is a TA6 disclosure trigger. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 brought in a unified 10-year enforcement period for planning breaches in England (in force from April 2024), so the immunity clock is longer than the old 4-year rule for many breaches.

5. Damp, leaks and hidden defects

Q4–Q5 cover defects, repairs and ongoing problems. Painting over damp staining the week before viewings is the kind of concealment courts treat harshly. If you have invoices, plumber reports, leak detection surveys or insurance claims — disclose them.

6. Flooding, contamination and environmental hazards

TA6 Q7 covers flooding (Q7.1–7.5), contamination (Q7.6), radon (Q7.7) and knotweed (Q7.8). The Environment Agency's flood risk map and the British Geological Survey radon map are accessible to buyers — but past flood events, insurance claims and remediation work are seller knowledge that must be disclosed. gov.uk/check-flood-risk shows the public-record baseline.

What a careful 2026 seller actually does

If you are selling on the open market and want to insulate yourself against a post-completion misrepresentation claim, the following is now standard advice from conveyancing solicitors after Patarkatsishvili:

1. Audit your own files first. Gather every report, survey, contractor invoice, insurance claim, neighbour letter, council letter and email correspondence concerning the property. If you have it, your TA6 cannot truthfully say "Not Known" about that subject.
2. Answer in writing, with supporting documents. Where a defect or issue exists, say "Yes" and attach the reports. This converts a hidden risk into a known one — and a buyer who proceeds with eyes open cannot later sue.
3. Use "Not Known" sparingly and honestly. Only for matters where you genuinely have not been made aware of an issue. For inherited or recently bought properties this is more often legitimate; for long-owned homes it is harder to justify.
4. Cross-check with your DMCC material information disclosure. What your estate agent put on Rightmove and Zoopla must match your TA6. Inconsistencies are evidence of deceit.
5. Keep your draft answers and emails. The contemporaneous documentation around how you completed TA6 is the best defence to a later fraud allegation.
6. Take legal advice before answering Q2, Q7.8 and Q9. These are the three most litigated sections. A short solicitor's consultation is cheap insurance.

The cash-buyer alternative — disclosure risk transferred

For sellers who know they have a disclosure problem — knotweed in the back garden, subsidence on the mortgage history, a long-running boundary dispute, an extension without Building Regulations sign-off — the open market is no longer a low-risk route to sale. Even a clean sale today can resurface as litigation three or four years on.

A professional cash buyer like South Yorkshire Property Buyers changes the disclosure model. We inspect the property, we ask direct questions about issues, we accept the property in its known condition, and we do not rely on TA6 as a basis for later claims. We routinely buy properties with:

• Japanese knotweed infestations (current or treated)
• Subsidence history and underpinning
• Active neighbour disputes
• Unauthorised extensions or loft conversions
• Damp, leaks and structural issues — see sell a house that needs repairs
• Title defects, restrictive covenants and adverse possession edges

The price reflects the condition — typically 80–85% of clean-property market value — but the disclosure landmine is defused. You sign, you complete, you move on. There is no buyer waiting four years to sue you under the Patarkatsishvili route.

Patarkatsishvili v Woodward-Fisher TA6 disclosure FAQs