IntroductionTins must be informed with information that will enlighten her about her options, but first we must understand the facts and issues of the case, then information about the legal issues will be presented and then the determination of whether Tina has suffered actual loss or damage and also describes other possible actions she can take, so a summary describing all the actions she can take. Case In Tina's case the relevant information is: • Tina is looking to buy a house and asks Simon about the safety of the garage, Simon says “don't worry about that. He is perfectly safe and sound. I'm a surveyor and I should know.”• Tina relies on this and says “Oh well, that's right then” and after a further inspection of the house, Tin agrees to buy and tells Simon to take out the contract.• A contract is created which does not contain guarantees with respect to the garage. • Tina signs the contract after discussing the matter with her lawyers. • After the deal, the garage explodes during a storm. Now that the information and facts are presented in order or sequence , we can now analyze it and determine whether Tina has the ability to sue for breach of contract and, if not, whether there are other ways to obtain compensation for the damage caused to the garage. Fraudulent Misrepresentation Fraudulent misrepresentation is distinguished from innocent misrepresentation by the intentional deception of one party by the other (Andy Gibson and Douglas Fraser, 2007, p. 325). For a fraudulent statement to occur, the following elements must be established: • There must be a misrepresentation of fact, not an opinion, unless the person making the statement has such an opinion, • The representation must be false, • The person making the representation must know that it is false, or not believe in its truth, or be recklessly negligent, • The representation must be made with the intention that the other party will act in reliance on it, • The statement must actually deceive the innocent party, i.e. be prosecuted, and• The innocent party must have suffered some loss. Since a contract induced by fraud is voidable in the opinion of the deceived party, it remains binding until annulled (Andy Gibson and Douglas Fraser, 2007, pg 325 ). Therefore, the deceived party's position is as follows: • Since fraud is a tort, in addition to any other remedies available to the deceived party, damages may be recoverable in a deception action.