The High Court has ordered Certified Home Ltd, along with its directors Lilian and Dennis Oketch, to respond to a lawsuit filed by three US-based clients within 14 days.
The clients, Elizabeth Wangari Green, Caroline Ongito, and Eddah Wanjiku Kimani, are seeking a refund of Ksh 15.5 million after accusing the company of breaching a contract related to the construction of KWITU Gardens Phase 2, a planned ultra-gated residential estate intended for diaspora investors.
Judge Lucy Mbugwa made it clear that should Certified Home Ltd fail to respond within the 14-day period, a default judgment would be issued in favor of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs allege that the real estate company misrepresented land ownership and failed to address their concerns regarding construction quality, financial transparency, and contractual obligations.
The lawsuit highlights a series of complaints against Certified Home Ltd, including the use of substandard materials, lack of architectural plans, and absence of necessary government approvals for the project.
These issues not only compromised the integrity of the proposed housing units but also raised serious doubts about the project’s potential resale value, which the company had marketed as lucrative.
Documents from the case also indicate that the directors, Lilian and Dennis Oketch, made misleading statements about the value and future prospects of the housing units, enticing investors from the Kenyan diaspora, particularly those based in the US, to commit their funds without due diligence.
This case is symbolic of a broader problem in Kenya’s real estate sector, where numerous companies have been accused of engaging in fraudulent activities, especially in land buying and off-plan property deals.
Many clients, particularly those in the diaspora, have fallen victim to scams, losing millions in investments due to companies failing to deliver on their promises.
Certified Home Ltd, as this case suggests, may be yet another in a line of real estate firms whose business practices are being called into question.
The plaintiffs’ frustration reflects the growing distrust within the diaspora community toward real estate companies operating in Kenya.
Many of these firms have been accused of preying on clients who are not physically present to monitor the progress of their investments.
Red flags such as unclear land ownership, lack of permits, and poor communication are common in such scams.
Despite the plaintiffs’ strong case, there are concerns that the Kenyan justice system may be compromised, as similar cases have often seen real estate companies benefiting from delays or legal loopholes.
Many victims of real estate fraud in Kenya, particularly those in the diaspora, have expressed dissatisfaction with the slow pace of justice and the apparent favoritism shown toward powerful companies in the sector.
The outcome of this case will likely set a big precedent for other diaspora investors seeking justice in Kenya’s notoriously corrupt real estate market.
If the plaintiffs win, it could encourage other victims of similar schemes to come forward and seek legal recourse.
A dismissal or further delays could further damage the credibility of Kenya’s real estate market and its ability to attract foreign investment.
Add Comment