Is Merv guilty of misrepresentation for his advertisement regarding the bonus room?

The correct answer indicates that Merv is guilty of misrepresentation because he should have been aware of the conversion issues regarding the bonus room. In real estate transactions, accurate representation of property features is crucial to maintain transparency and build trust with potential buyers. If Merv advertised the bonus room as a legal bedroom without disclosing any relevant zoning or legal conversion issues, it constitutes misrepresentation.

Understanding the implications of misrepresentation is important. It is not merely about the assertion made, but also about whether the seller had a reasonable basis for believing that assertion to be true. If Merv had knowledge or should have reasonably known that the bonus room did not meet the legal requirements to be considered a bedroom, failing to disclose this information misleads buyers regarding the property's value and usability, ultimately affecting their purchasing decision.

In terms of the other options, claiming the description was valid would imply that no misrepresentation occurred, which overlooks the legal limitations of what constitutes a bedroom. Similarly, stating that Merv was transparent does not align with the responsibility to disclose critical legal information that buyers need to make informed decisions.