Couple suing over moth row 'portrayed home as like zoo's insect house'
by MARK DUELL · Mail OnlineA super-rich couple suing for over £36million over a moth infestation have been accused of portraying their home as like 'an insect house at a zoo.'
Iya Patarkatsishvili and Dr Yevhen Hunyak are suing the seller of their luxury London home for not telling them about the moths, which they say ruin their clothes and spoil their wine, and have forced them to install 400 traps around their house.
They want their money back on the £32.5million purchase of the enormous Horbury Villa in Notting Hill, plus damages, claiming that they would have to tear their house apart to rid it of the infestation.
But lawyers for seller, William Woodward-Fisher, are fighting the High Court claim and say the moth presence in the house has been blown out of proportion and could be just the 'base level' seen in other London houses.
'It is possible when reading some of the evidence in this case to imagine being inside the property like being in an insect house at a zoo,' said his barrister Jonathan Seitler KC.
'However, any given level of moth presence can bother one person whilst not bothering, or even being noticeable to, another.'
Previously, the High Court heard that Mr Woodward-Fisher, 68, who formerly competed for Great Britain as a rower, bought the site in 2011 and lived there with interior designer wife Kerry, 64.
The house was extended and radically remodelled by Mr Woodward-Fisher to about 11,000 sq ft, before it was sold on to Dr Hunyak, 50, and Ms Patarkatsishvili, 41, in 2019.
Dr Hunyak is a pediatric dentist who practices in Chelsea, while his wife is daughter of Badri Patarkatsishvili, a Georgian businessman who fell out with Vladimir Putin and set up home in the UK in 2000 before dying of heart failure in 2008.
Prior to purchase, they or their staff visited the mansion - which has seven bathrooms, a swimming pool, spa, cinema and gym in a newly formed double basement - on at least 11 separate occasions, the court was told.
But despite their careful inspection, the couple say they were dismayed when they were hit with what one insect specialist called 'an infestation of extreme proportions… amounting to millions of moths.'
They claim moths would land on their toothbrushes, that £50,000 worth of clothes were left in tatters and that they sometimes have to throw away wine after finding dead moths floating in glasses.
They are suing, claiming Mr Woodward-Fisher was guilty of negligence or 'fraudulent misrepresentation' in not revealing previous moth issues when they asked pre-purchase about any problems with 'vermin.'
However, Mr Woodward-Fisher strenuously denies doing anything wrong, pointing out that he told his solicitor that the house had previously had moths, but been told they do not qualify as vermin.
He also said that despite his wife, Kerry, having been bothered by clothes moths in the past, it was not enough to concern him and had in any case been solved by pest controllers by July 2018.
And his barrister Mr Seitler told the judge, Mr Justice Fancourt, that moth activity had been overstated and portrayed as like being in an 'insect house in a zoo'.
Experiences of moths vary from one person to another, he said, with some people not even noticing them.
'As Mr and Mrs Woodward-Fisher between them demonstrate, any given level of moth presence can bother one person whilst not bothering, or even being noticeable to, another,' he said.
'Further, the position can change over time. There are some photos and videos of moth presence, but there are also a lack of photos where they might be expected.
'There is a contrast between the language used in various pest controllers' reports compared with the photographs attached to them showing evidence of the moths actually seen.
'For instance, they refer to a 'medium-high level infestation' and then the photographs meant to show that contain no live moths, merely minute grains said to be eggs that are unnoticeable to the untrained eye.
'Other statements say that there is a 'high-level infestation' and attach over 70 photos which between them show only one or two live moths in the property.'
Previously, Dr Hunyak had told the judge that, when he sees them, he concentrates on catching them rather than taking photos of the 'agile' insects.
Cross-examining moth expert, Dr Andrew Whittington, who gave evidence for the couple, Mr Woodward-Fisher's barrister put to him that the couple may only have experienced the 'base level' of moths seen in older London houses.
But although he said moth numbers are rising as people move away from synthetic fabrics, Dr Whittington said the normal level can fluctuate from year to year and that, from Dr Hunyak's evidence, it appeared the problem 'persists.'
He said Dr Hunyak had spoken of having installed 400 moth traps around the house to keep on top of the problem and still swats them on a daily basis.
The court previously heard that the moths in the house could have been caused by thermal insulation installed in the walls and used as food by moth larvae.
But Dr Whittington told the court that the insulation in the walls should not have been susceptible to moths, as that specific type is treated.
'It may have been infected in storage prior to installation, but that's complete conjecture, it's guess work,' he said from the witness box.
The barrister put to him that it is 'unlikely' that 'hidden pockets' of woollen insulation had been left behind after work was done to remove it in 2020.
But Dr Whittington responded: 'I know from personal experience that it can. It can snag on a nail and bits get left behind. Small pieces can sustain several hundred moths.'
The court heard an expert for the couple had estimated it would cost nearly £10million to strip the house to its 'shell' and root out any lingering pieces of insulation.
But Mr Seitler said further work was unnecessary and it is Mr Woodward-Fisher's case that any historic moth-related problems were sorted out earlier.
And he criticised the claimed £10million cost of the disputed work as 'staggering,' pointing out that an estimate obtained by Mr Woodward-Fisher was only around £160,000.
Dr Hunyak and Ms Patarkatsishvili want the judge to reverse their purchase of the house so they can get their money back, plus damages, to a total of more than £36m.
If they remain in the house, they are claiming more than £13million to cover their losses, the potential reduction in value of their home, and to pay for further work.
Mr Woodward-Fisher denies misleading the couple and says buying back the house would be 'impossible' anyway, while criticising the amount of work they claim needs doing and disputing the alleged reduction in value of the property.
The case continues.