Jane owns a house built in 1915. The house has been plagued with chronic cockroach infestation. Although Jane fumigated it regularly, roaches reappeared in ever increasing numbers within a few weeks of treatment. Also, the house was slowly sinking into soft ground on one side. The sinking can only be corrected by an expensive process that requires the side of the house to be jacked up while a firm concrete foundation is laid. The sinking has caused deep cracks in the living room wall. Jane replastered the wall a few times, but the continuing movement reopened the cracks soon afterwards. Jane then read in the newspaper the neighboring property had been bought by the state for use as a halfway house for wayward teenagers who like to play loud music. This was the final straw and she decided to sell.

Jane fumigated the house, plastered the cracks, and repainted the wall just before the house was place on the market. Gunner came to a house showing, and asked Jane: "Does the house have termites?"Jane said No. A week later, Jane notices signs of termite damage in the basement.

Then, Gunner suddenly makes a full price offer, using a REPC standard Utah form. Jane accepts immediately. The REPC included merger clause that stated that no representations had been made save for those expressed in the writing. The REPC set out the basic terms of the transaction and made no representations concerning the property. The transaction closed, and Gunner moved into his new home. Very soon thereafter, the roaches reappeared, the wall cracked, the loud teenagers moved in next door, and the termites were discovered. Does Gunner have grounds for avoiding the sale?