National Basketball Association player Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is suing owners of the lakefront mansion previously occupied by Canada’s “crypto king.” The basketball player also claimed to have learned of Pleterski’s occupancy of the property after his girlfriend reported the threatening visit to the police.
Voiding Sale Agreement
Canadian professional basketball star, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, is reportedly suing owners of the lakefront mansion previously occupied by Ontario’s self-proclaimed crypto king Aiden Pleterski. In his suit, Gilgeous-Alexander accuses the property’s unidentified owners of failing to disclose Pleterski’s tenancy in the $45,000-per-month mansion.
According to a CBC report, the National Basketball Association (NBA) star claims to have been threatened by a victim of Pleterski’s collapsed crypto investment scheme. Gilgeous-Alexander also claimed to have learned of Pleterski’s occupancy of the property after his girlfriend reported the threatening visit to the police.
Upon learning this, Gilgeous-Alexander and his girlfriend are said to have vacated the $8.4 million property and filed the lawsuit. The basketball player insists the property owners’ alleged misrepresentation is enough to void the sale agreement.
“The defendants knew that if the history of threatening visits to the property, and ongoing risk of same, was disclosed, then no reasonable person looking at properties of that type, quality, and price would purchase it,” the NBA star said in his statement of claim.
Aiden Pleterski’s Abduction
However, lawyers for the property’s sellers reportedly rejected the misrepresentation claim. Since the collapse of his crypto investment platform, Pleterski (24) received threats from investors who lost more than $40 million. At one point, he was reportedly kidnapped by a man who claimed to have lost $740,000.
Meanwhile, a Toronto-based real estate lawyer, John Zinati, has cast his doubts on the lawsuit’s success prospects. Still, Zinati said if Gilgeous-Alexander and his girlfriend were to prevail, the court would only award money to fix the property’s problem.
“The law is generally more inclined to award damages … awarding money to fix a problem, not saying you can get out of the deal,” the lawyer said.
What are your thoughts on this story? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.