This is the £ 1.5 million Versace-designed London flat that the owner has seen go to court and claims that the property is not what she bought after she discovered that the bathroom has no bath.
Mi Suk Park paid £ 381,000 for a deposit in an apartment with two bedrooms and parking space in the 50 -storey Aykon London One Tower in nine elms.
She claims that she called the 'Ultimate in Luxury' for the flat in the building 'Versace Tower' after a controversial collaboration between developers and the fashion house to design the interior.
New images show the inside of the apartment that led the owner to withdraw from her purchase and bring the developer to court.
Mrs. Park, 54, had viewed a brochure and map and made the 'lifelong decision' to splash on the luxury path – which was meant as 'main teeth of her and her husband for retirement'.
But when she first saw the apartment, it was' equipment and clearly different from the layout as set out in the plan and the description she had seen before she paid the down payment, she said the Court of Central London County.
She then refused to move to her new house and is now complaining for more than £ 700,000, demands the deposit earlier that she paid and cash money to cover five years of rent, in addition to other losses they suffered.
Her problems include a bedroom that is smaller than she had expected, one of the two bathrooms that do not have a bathtub, a intrusive utility cabinet that 'hinders' what she expected to be an 'open living space' and a two-year delay in the apartment that is ready.
Photos taken from the apartment shows the cabinet (left) that, according to Mrs. Park, said 'impinges' on the living space
Mrs. Park said that the view from the flat was 'equipment and clearly different' than the brochure
Shown: in the second bathroom of the apartment that did not contain a bath
But developer Nine Elms Property LTD – a jersey -based entity that is owned by a parent company in Dubai – fights the claim and the counter to sue the accountant for not completing the purchase, insisting that her deposit has been forfeited.
Mrs Park claims her £ 381,000 deposits, £ 131,000 rent she has paid since 2020, £ 150,000 about the sale of her house, which she says they could have realized more if she had not rushed to get the 2020 completion date, plus approximately £ 45,000 in extra losses.
The company's lawyers claim that the brochure that MS Park saw before she put down her money was only for illustrative purposes and made it clear that what was shown was just an example of a 'typical layout'.
Nazar Mohammad, for MS Park, who runs an accountancy firm in Surrey, Judge Alan Johns said that his customer had agreed the deal in November 2015 and had paid her down payment for a purchase price of £ 1,524,400.
“The apartment was an 'off -plan' purchase on the 29 floors opposite the west and, when built, it would have two bedrooms and two bathrooms, with a bathtub in each critical,” he said.
'It would be an open-plan layout. The defendant added a plan to the sales and purchase agreement and signed the same plan. '
The flat was meant to be ready to move and MS Park sold her house in 2019 in preparation, he continued.
But when it was finally ready in 2022 and she saw it, she was deeply unhappy.
He told the judge that Mrs. Park refused to complete the purchase 'because the apartment was essential and clearly different from the layout of the apartment, as set out in the plan and the description'.
Under reasons why MS Park marks, she claimed that the second bathroom in the flat did not contain a bath as advertised
Accountant Mi Suk Park, 54, who refused to complete the purchase of the flat, outside the court of the Central London County
The 50 -storey Aykon London One Tower in Nine Elms, Vauxhall, called the 'Versace Tower'
Example interior apartment image of promotional material for the Aykon London One Tower. Mrs. Park claims that the flat was 'essentially different' than what she had seen in the brochure
“The expert from the suspect and the defendant accept that the built apartment is not the same as the plan associated with the contract of November 6, 2015.”
He said that 'irreparable infringements' of the purchase contract include the fact that 'the Utility cabinet hinders the living space', which cannot be changed.
Other alleged infringements, he said that the second bedroom is smaller and 'the second bathroom has no bathtub'.
Mohammad said the brochure promised that the apartment 'would represent the ultimate luxury', complete with 'floor to ceiling windows and panoramic views of London'.
'Without qualifying, the brochure describes it as the ultimate luxury and combines it with panoramic views. The increased expectation and the requested price is linked, “he said.
He accused the developer of 'wrong show' and had 'caused' the sale to MS Park with the brochure and map.
He added: 'The court should not lose sight of the fact that this was a high specification, a high -quality apartment and small/compact, for which the claimant agreed to pay a large sum of money.
'The issue before the court is whether the defendant acted within the conditions of the contract when the variations in the structure and the layout of the expected apartment were made and whether these changes were material.
'The claimant does not accept that the defendant has the right to enforce the contract. The contract fractures by the defendant are such that it did not deliver the tailor -made apartment that it had expected to deliver. '
In the witness box, Mrs. Park told the judge that it had been a 'lifelong decision' to splash on the £ 1.5 million designer apartment and it was to be the main building of her and her husband to retire. “
All interiors of the luxury tower block were designed by the Haute Couture Fashion House Versace
Lawyers for the developer said that the images such as those of a swimming pool were used for illustrative purposes
The common residential area in the building was also designed by Versace
A concept image of the Aykon Nine Elms Tower before it was built
The flats were advertised as the 'Ultimate in Luxury', complete with panoramic views
A swimming pool is raised high above London with a wide view of the skyline of the city
She insisted on what she had seen in the brochure and plans before she put down her money were “structural elements that should have been resolved.”
But Rupert Cohen, cross-hearing for the developers, said that the brochure had shown example apartments and pointed out that “at the top of every page … it says” typical layout. “
“You can call me carefree, but I didn't see” typically “as an important word,” she replied.
Mr. Cohen said to court: 'Mrs. Park refused to complete and instead claimed to withdraw the contract on October 14, 2022.
'Subsequently, the defendant served on November 22, 2022 on November 22, 2022 and, after not completing the claimant, a notification of termination on January 9, 2023. MS Park issued these procedures on April 21, 2023.
“The court is invited to grant the statements requested in the counterparture, namely that the contract has been terminated and forfeit the … payments to the defendant.”
The case continues.
