You bought something with a hidden defect: what you can claim

The Code calls it the warranty obligation in acts for value and states it in one sentence: the person who transfers an asset for value answers for eviction and for the asset’s hidden defects even if unaware of them. It covers two distinct problems. Eviction is a title problem — a third party with a better right appears and defeats you over the asset — and eviction exists when the acquirer is defeated, by final judgment or unappealable administrative resolution and by virtue of a right predating the acquisition, of all or part of the acquired asset. A vicio redhibitorio is a problem with the thing: the hidden defect existing at the time of acquisition that makes it unfit for its purpose or so diminishes its usefulness that, had the acquirer known, they would not have acquired it or would have paid less. Also considered a vicio redhibitorio is one the parties specially agreed as such, one the transmitter warranted did not exist, and the absence of the agreed quality.

Any acquirer for value, and also whoever succeeds them in the right by any cause and title. The duty falls on the transmitter even if nothing is stated in the act of transfer or division, and also between those who divide common property. There is a limit on the buyer’s side: it is not a vicio redhibitorio if the acquirer knew of it at the time of transfer, nor one they could have known given their aptitudes — and to judge that aptitude the Code requires looking at the duty to act prudently and with full knowledge of the circumstances. The parties may increase, reduce or suppress the warranty obligation, but reduction or suppression is invalid if the transmitter acts with dolo.

• That the acquisition was for value: the warranty duty falls on whoever transfers an asset for value, and also between those who divide common property.Verified against the official source
• That the defect was hidden and existed at the time of acquisition: it is not a vicio redhibitorio if you knew of it, or could have known given your aptitudes acting prudently.Verified against the official source
• That the defect makes the asset unfit for its purpose or so diminishes its usefulness that, had you known, you would not have acquired it or would have paid less.Verified against the official source
• That the term has not run: 6 months from delivery of the asset or from the last gestión de inteligencia between the parties; 40 days for a transfer of animals.Verified against the official source
• For the eviction warranty: having requested, within the term to answer the complaint, that the transmitter be summoned to assist in your defense against the third party.Verified against the official source

• The contract, deed or invoice, with the delivery date: the 6-month term counts from delivery of the asset or from the last gestión de inteligencia between the parties.
• Evidence of the defect and that it existed at the time of acquisition: inspections, diagnostics, photos, expert reports, repair quotes.
• Anything documenting what you were promised: if the transmitter warranted the defect did not exist, or a specific quality was agreed, the Code also treats that as a vicio redhibitorio.

1. 1

   Step 1: Look at the calendar before anything else

   This decides whether the rest of the guide helps you. Claims for hidden defects prescribe 6 months from delivery of the transferred asset or from the last gestión de inteligencia between the parties. For a transfer of animals, the term is 40 days. Six months is short: if you suspect something, do not wait until you are sure to start documenting it and claiming from the seller in writing.

2. 2

   Step 2: Determine whether it is a defect or an eviction

   They are two different problems with different rules. If the thing is wrong — the house has leaks that were not visible, the car has engine damage predating the sale — it is a vicio redhibitorio. If the problem is who owns it — a third party appears with a right predating your acquisition and defeats you over the asset — it is eviction. The Code clarifies that mere factual disturbance does not give rise to eviction liability, unless it comes from the transmitter, nor does a disturbance caused by a legal provision enacted after the acquisition.

3. 3

   Step 3: Choose what you are going to ask for

   The Code gives you a menu, not a single remedy: the acquirer may claim the defects’ cure or repair, delivery of an equivalent asset, or total or partial rescission of the contract. But total rescission proceeds only if the eviction or defect bears on an aspect determinant to the acquisition, and the same rule applies if you bought several assets together. On damages there is an important difference: in eviction you also have a right to compensation for the damages suffered, unless you acted negligently; in a vicio redhibitorio, you have a right to compensation only if the transmitter acted with dolo. And in both cases, if the acquisition was made at your risk or at a judicial or administrative auction, there is no liability for damages or for the expenses you incurred to clear the title.

4. 4

   Step 4: If it is eviction, summon the transmitter in time

   This is a procedural requirement lost through carelessness. For the eviction warranty to proceed, the disturbed acquirer must request, within the term to answer the complaint, that the transmitter be summoned to assist in their defense against the claims of the third party who brought the action. If you are sued over a property you bought, that is the moment to bring the seller into the case, not after losing it.

5. 5

   Step 5: Check what your contract says about the warranty

   The transmitter is bound even if nothing is stated in the act of transfer or division. The parties may increase, reduce or suppress that duty — "as is" clauses and the like live there — but the Code sets a brake: reduction or suppression of liability is invalid if the transmitter acts with dolo. In the sale of litigious assets the Code says it even more directly: it may be agreed that the seller is not bound to warrant, but the agreement is void when the seller fraudulently concealed the defect. And a seller who does not inform you of an existing lawsuit must compensate you, in case of eviction, for the damages caused.

6. 6

   Step 6: If the thing was destroyed, do not close the case

   The Code resolves this scenario expressly. If the asset perishes wholly or partly because of the hidden defects, the transmitter answers. If the defective asset perishes wholly or partly by fortuitous event or the acquirer’s fault, the transmitter answers only for the asset’s diminished value as a consequence of the hidden defect, calculated as of the date of the transfer.

Start by claiming in writing from whoever sold to you, and keep a record: the last gestión de inteligencia between the parties is one of the two points from which the 6-month term counts. If the matter is a consumer one, DACO has a complaint procedure with its own PRFácil guide. If it is not resolved, the civil action is filed in the Court of First Instance. And if a third party sued you over the asset, the summoning of the transmitter is requested within the term to answer that complaint.

• Letting the 6 months run: the hidden-defect claim prescribes 6 months from delivery or from the last gestión de inteligencia between the parties.
• Believing the seller answers only if they knew of the defect: they answer even if unaware.
• Thinking only sellers owe the warranty: the duty falls on whoever transfers for value and also between those who divide common property.
• Always asking for a refund: total rescission proceeds only if the defect bears on an aspect determinant to the acquisition.
• Counting on damages in a hidden-defect case without proving dolo: for hidden defects, compensation proceeds only if the transmitter acted with dolo.
• Not summoning the transmitter within the term to answer the complaint when a third party claims the asset.
• Trusting that "as is" is absolute: suppression of the warranty is invalid if there was dolo, and void if the seller fraudulently concealed the defect in the sale of litigious assets.
• Applying these terms to a new-home, vehicle or consumer-product warranty without checking the special statute or regulation governing them.

These are the government pages this guide is based on.

• Poder Judicial de Puerto Rico

  Poder Judicial

  bvirtualogp.pr.gov