I agree with your general observation. In the example I gave I was thinking that the X would be some reasonable period of years, such as
5+ years ago. If it was 6 months ago and that was the third time in a year than yes, just mentioning the last 6 months but not the last year would be iffy.
"full disclosure" could be as simple as "great grandad lived here since he was born in 1913, and has done basically nothing to the house in the last 50 years. The outhouse was replaced with a septic system at that time, and water and hydro and central heating were installed at the same time"
The buyer then knows exactly what he is buying - a pig in a poke.
A quick google shows that it's probably 3 years in CT, at least. Probably varies from state to state.
But obviously that aside, the longer it goes, in general the less likely the buyer is to prevail. But then again, the roots thing is a recurrent problem that takes a while to develop. It's not like a leaking roof, which you'd expect would be found quickly.
Not saying they shouldn't disclose it. But I wouldn't be so fearful of a nasty lawsuit either. If he discloses it, he's very likely going to have to pay for the repair. If he doesn't and the buyer has a problem in a year, then they buyer is going to have to get it fixed. Their potential recovery is pretty much what it cost to get the tree roots cleaned out and then to presumably replace the sewer line. I guess if the house has a basement bathroom and there is the potential for the place to get filled up with sewage, because some dummy keeps flushing the toilet, that could be a factor. But it also usually costs money to bring a lawsuit, it's not trivial and there is no guarantee of winning after you shell out all the legal fees. If the sewer line cost $5k or $10K, are you going to go to war over that? Especially if the seller says I'll pay it, or most of it? I mean the court is going to award actual damages, not a $100K pay day.
The seller might find that a year later if the problem actually happens, the buyer contacts him, he might just settle it with the buyer for about the same amount it would have cost him to replace the sewer himself. Again, not saying that's the ethical or right thing to do in this case, just making the observation.
It could be that simple, if that is all true and it's all that the seller really knows.
Is that what we're talking about here? I must have missed that part. I thought it was a house being sold where the owner lives there, has had problems with tree roots every few years, etc, etc And even in a foreclosure, I believe the bank probably still isn't exempt from state disclosure laws. They may wind up answering "no, I know nothing" to every question, but I'll bet they still have to fill out the forms, at least in some states. You're confusing a situation where a seller truly doesn't know about material defects, so they have nothing to disclose and one where they do, but don't disclose it. And I say if you do the latter, you've violated the law in most states and you're not going to hide behind calling it an "as-is" sale.
I spent the years between 1940 and 1950 in Lynbrook, New York. (on Long Island) We had cesspools dug in our front lawns. these were bottle shaped chambers about 15 feet deep by 10 feet in diameter, with concrete covers aroud 4 feet in diameter and a couple of feet under the lawn that were lined with concrete blocks with popenings through them for water to seep through. All of our sewage went into these things, and they were pumped out periodically when they got full and didn;t work any more. The trucks that pumped them out brought the sewage to a treatment plant somewhere, just as sewer systems today take it through pipes to these same plants. At the plant, it received, "primary" treatment before it was pumped into the ocean where, (supposedly) it didn't harm the environment.
Many disclosures are not problems. It could simply be notice. For example, we all know water heaters don't last forever. If you replaced it 8 years ago why not just disclose that when the question asked on the form is "Condition of water heater". Just say "Replaced
8 years ago". Then you won't have a buyer move in and have it leak and claim they it "looked like new" and they thought it was new and if it was "so old" you should have disclosed it. Another option is to simply sell "as-is" even if you still disclose. And NOTHING has to be dealt with to the buyers satisfaction unless that's what the contract says. Most standard contracts make provisions for... 1 - A required disclosure by the owner (the owner can answer "unknown" to everything if they wish but if they really knew something that can be risky) 2 - A ten day inspection period. Usually with a NOTE suggesting the buyer hire a professional inspection service. 3 - a requirement for the Buyer to request in writing the repair of those things deemed in need of repair. There is usually a time frame during which they need to make this request, perhaps within 5 days after the inspection period expires. 4 - Acceptance or rejection by the Seller of the buyers demands. 5a - If accepted, then it gets fixed, reinspected, and sale moves forward. 5b. - if rejected, then the buyer needs to decide whether to accept it without repairs or propose a reduction in price or ???. Whether to accept it is up to the seller.The above presumes there is no preset dollar amount within the seller "must repair" or other similar provision. Basically the inspection period is a 10 day window for the buyer to get cold feet -- here in AZ they can basically claim their detailed inspection just makes them leery of the house and reject it. Technically, they need a real reason but no one wants to go to court and have their home sale tied up for a couple years so sellers won't challenge a rejection.
Similarly, if a seller wants out they can reject all repair requests and hope the buyer walks away but the seller has the upper hand since they can just accept the defects and proceed with the sale. That said, you really can't force someone to sell if they change their mind, the best you could do is sue them for damages, assuming you can prove damages from not being able to buy that house.
Hi, In my neighborhood, there is a house for sale for over 2 years. Nice house but it suffered a sewage back up causing big professional clean up and repairing the collapsed pipe. I think no one wants to buy i because of that history. If there was no damage inside the house it would've been different story.
Selling as is is great as long as your willing to accept a very low price for the home:( and dont care how long it taes to sell:(
90% of buyers want a move in ready home with no work necessary. later they will redecorate, but they demand move my stuff in and were done.as is makes home selling hard most customers arent interested, and those who are want give away prices.....
lawyers who work on contigency are not a sellers friend.
mr X buys a home and 9 months later the tree roots back up the sewer. the plumber is called and after snaking and a camera inspection the new owner gets the bad news, new sewer line needed....
he mentions it to his next door neighbor who reports XYZ plumbing came in the past. They have the BiG RED Truck with the graphics, its hard to miss:)
a quick call to XYZ plumbing confirms......
the new owner has little money and a new mortage. so he finds a lawyer who only gets paid if he wins the case.
the lawyer asks what about the damages from the back up?? any mold in your basement now? how about restoration? sidewalks permits, large tree removal to get macine in to do work...... etc etc.
lawyer gets percentage of win so lets run the bill up......
old owner spent home sales money on something else, and once the courts are done with him and he ha paid lawyer to attempt to defend him its a big mess......
all avoided by disclosing...
And you often still come out ahead over spending to fix everything any potential customer MIGHT find objectionable. And there is almost always somebody looking for a fixer-upper to "flip". Let HIM take the risk, unless YOU are knowlegeable enough and capable of doing the repairs yourself - in which case why the heck have you not fixed it already?????
Lawyers don't typically take a case for recovering $5k for a sewer line on a contingency basis. And even if they do, when they send you a demand letter, you can negotiate and settle.
A lawyer typically isn't going to take a case for a $5K sewer line on contigency. And even if they did, before it got to that, don't you think the buyer is going to contact the seller and present the $5K bill? So, you pay the $5k bill. Your method seems to be for the seller to repair, replace every last thing that any potential buyer might someday object to or someday after the sale sue over. All I'm saying is that in a case like the above, you're spending $5K for sure on the small chance you're going to have to spend it later because something goes wrong. Which way are you better off?
A - Replace 20 things today because someday a buyer might want it fixed during inspection, or later sue you for it.
B - Replace a couple things at inspection or later reimburse the buyer if they come after you?
How about the buyer has to PROVE they actually had a backup that amounted to something? That they reallyspent that money. If they have a problem with the sewer, do you think they are gonna shell out $25K for a job that could be done for $5k, on the CHANCE they might recover the $25K later? How about they win and then the seller is judgement proof, ie they can't collect? Any rational person is going to do what work really needs to be done in a cost effective way.
Only if some buyer is stupid enough to actually do that. I say very few are.
If he has no money, then how in the hell is a lawyer going to make money taking a case on contigency? Answer: they won't. They like slip and falls or auto accidents where there is an insurance company with deep pockets. And where it's a lot easier to find a doctor to treat neck pain. Who can prove if a person actually feels pain that could last a lifetime? And juries feel sympathy for someone in a car accident. Over a sewer? Not so much. It's a lot easier to defend a claim over a sewer. Like real bills, real canceled checks, showing you actually spent the money.
Again, I'm not saying not to disclose. Just that you're creating a strawman over fear of being sued that largely doesn't exist. Yeah, a buyer may come back at your for something, at some point. But if they do, it's all negotiable and not the end of the world.
Around here the manager of the MTSA said publically a new sewer line done in bulk that is entire neighborhoods customer owned lines averages 12 grand per home plus restoration. The lines are under streets driveways sidewalks walls etc.
replacing customer service line can easily cost 20 grand per home, lines are often 12 to 15 feet deep, done to prevent freezing in the winter
nearly every home has troubles, when roots enter so does rain water which floods the sewer plant.
the sewer authority has tripled or more the capacity of their plants, replaced mains in many areas and still has troubles
Where is "around here" that has a frost depth of 12 to 15 ft? Here in nyc area it's 4ft. I think somewhere around twice that is near the extreme for the lower 48. I think you're going off the deep end again......
Twenty grand to dig a 50ft ditch and install a sewer line sounds mighty high to me, even for NJ. Even the 12K sounds high. Just how long does any of this take with a backhoe? Sure, you could have the pathological case, where there is every obstruction imaginable in the way. But for the typical house where you go across a lawn, a couple bushes, maybe a sidewalk? $20K?
I seriously doubt very much ground water is going to get in there.
If everything has been repaired, including the "root" cause (no pun intended) then why would people be leery of buying a house that had a sewage backup more than 2 years ago?
There must be something else wrong with this "nice house".
Lining a sewer pipe far cheaper than replacing it.
BTW...where are you that you need to bury pipe 15 - 20 feet to prevent freezing?
How deep do post holes for a deck have to be?
..and this little story applies to the current thread ...wait for it... how?
..
The FEDS ordered a complete end to storm water runoff into sanitary sewers. some were co mingled from the start of sewers in the pittsburgh area. previously sewer water overflowed into rivers which provide drinking water and recreation.connecting downspouts to sewer lines were common till recently. now every home gets die test before sale.
because of the very hilly terrain many lines are super deep, for not only freeze protection but natural drainage to sewer plants. even with all this many areas have lift stations.
a friend looked at a bargain home it was super cheap except the sewer line went out of the back of the home to a stream bed 200 feet ........ 20 grand to replace the collapsed line. he looked at another home, it was wrongly connected to storm sewerrather than sanitary sewer. 18 to 20 grand, very deep plus street must be dug up and replaved by bonded registered contractors.
allegheny county has rules out the wazoole. and so does most of pennsylvania
Some people have a problem providing too much disclosure. The appropriate response is "Thanks for sharing."
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.