What is a key difference between intentional and negligent misrepresentation?

The distinction between intentional and negligent misrepresentation primarily centers on the intent behind the misrepresentation. In cases of intentional misrepresentation, the party making the statement intentionally provides false information with the objective of inducing another party to rely on that information. This involves a clear intent to deceive, which is a crucial element of the tort.

Intentional misrepresentation requires that the plaintiff prove that the defendant acted with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth, and that there was a specific intent to induce reliance on the misrepresentation. This intent is what differentiates it from negligent misrepresentation, which occurs when a party should have known their information was false but did not act with the same level of intent to deceive.

The other options provided do not accurately capture the essence of the distinction. For instance, while negligent misrepresentation may have some degree of disregard for truth, it does not require a reckless disregard standard. Additionally, all types of misrepresentation can lead to financial losses, and harm is an element needed to prove many torts but isn’t the defining feature that separates intentional from negligent misrepresentation.