Regulations Governing Underground Home Heating Oil Tanks

Who said a contractor did the job? And in at least one case, the filler was pointed DOWN, and the delivery man thought someone was screwing around, so he grabbed it and turned it UP first. It had been turned down for over 5 years, so that wasn't a real simple job. Should have "rang some bells" but apparently it didn't.

Reply to
clare
Loading thread data ...

More frequent than you think. The quantity may be a little exaggerated but consider the flow rate that a modern truck can deliver in the time it takes to listen for the whistle.

Reply to
George

Yet again I reiterate -- what is allowed depends on State law and what is _legally_required_ to be disclosed is also locally regulated. The above statement comes from the Realtor(R) Code of Ethics which say "should be disclosed" but how clearly that is done ime is from "mumblejumbleobtwi'malsomumblemumbledistractionshowingmumblemumbleOK?" to simply "it's in the contract very fine print; find it". That the particular section wasn't even adopted by the realtors until sometime in the '90s is indicative of how dear they hold the idea of "all commissions possible are mine".

I brought it up for OP's attention to point out that he can't _NECESSARILY_ be assured that the advice he or his friend are getting is totally unbiased w/o knowing the ground rules under which that advice is being given. And, of course, even if the agent is serving solely as seller's agent, there's still incentive to close the deal in a hurry which means may suggest doing things like this that may indeed expedite a sale but may not really be necessary.

This real or potential conflict of interest is why everyone should have representation on their own payroll who are fiduciarily bound to provide information solely in the best interest of their client. (imo, $0.02, etc., ...)

--

Reply to
dpb

...

Sorry for the empty posting... :(

I didn't see the question buried in the hypothetical situation that is the norm in locales that do allow dual agents. I wasn't/aren't much interested in arguing/discussing what is or isn't common practice; only the point previously raised to OP of "at least be aware of who is bearing advice and what may be their underlying motives...".

But to answer the question, the answer is "yes" there are states in which dual agency is not permitted (although they are relatively few, there are some). In one of those states, yes, the prospective unattached prospective buyer either has to handle the process on their own (where that is allowed but probably not the wisest choice for most even if is) or get another realtor to be their buyer's agent. The states I know of otomh are KS, MD and (I think AL). VA was discussing the issue; they were allowed; don't know if it changed or not. Who else might be on the list I've no clue; I've not researched areas I've either not resided in or had other reason to know about.

In states which don't allow it, it doesn't matter what the realtors wish were the law; the law is the law and since all are under the same jurisdiction it's not a competitive issue.

There are many arguments on both sides; the convenience one as your example is probably the one that wins in the argument (other than that realtors are one of the best-heeled lobbying organizations in virtually all State legislatures, of course).

Reply to
dpb

Now, now, now. Don't coufuse people who have never even used heating oil with eyewitness reports. We all know that the delivery men are certified by our trusted government, and could NEVER EVER make even the tiniest mistake.

Kinda like ME!

"IT'S GOOD TO BE .... ME!" - Gene Simmons

Steve

Reply to
Steve B

Of course at the end of the day, there is another problem. And that is that real estate agents, regardless of who they represent, are almost always paid on a SALE COMMISSION, not by the hour. So, even if you have an agreement and realtor who is supposed to be working only for you, they usually have a high incentive to just get the deal done. A classic example would be whether they really have any incentive to get you the highest price as seller. Face with getting a sure commission of 6% on deal at 300,000 or trying to get the $320,000 it might really be worth, it's obvious from an immdeiate financial perspective which is more advantageous. It's better for them to just get the deal done at the lower price and move on to the next deal.

Reply to
trader4

snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote: ...

Of course. Again the whole point of the point made was to make OP patently cognizant of being aware of the point of view of advice received vis a vis the provider of that advice.

--

Reply to
dpb

-snip-

-snip-

If you're referrin' to me, Steve, you're way off base. I've heated with oil for 40 years and my dad's house was oil for 12 before that. Never had anything but above ground- outside tanks [and never had one freeze- though it rarely gets to 20 below 0F anymore.]

I've also had an oil man refuse to put oil in my tank because my whistler wasn't working. I sticked it & showed him it was 1/2 empty- but he wouldn't put anything in until the whistler was working. Another oil guy from another company stopped pumping into my neighbor's already full tank because the whistler wasn't whistling.

Maybe it is just this area- or maybe I'm just lucky. But I can't still can't imagine any but the stupidest of delivery guys doing more than splashing some oil in a basement if some idiot leaves the fill pipe in place. The first gallon I put on the homeowner-- after that the driver is liable in my mind.

I don't think ours [NY] are. They need a drivers license for heavy, flammable materials trucks- but I've never seen a company call their drivers 'certified'. But I've never delivered oil, either, so I don't know.

Jim

Reply to
Jim Elbrecht

"Jim Elbrecht" wrote

I can easily imagine it. I've seen pretty dumb things happen over the years. Idiot proof something and we'll make a bigger and better idiot.

Reply to
Ed Pawlowski

You're missing the point. They have a contract with the seller, _by_ _definition_. They are *obligated* to the seller before anyone else. If they want to dance the line and do both, if even allowed, someone is going to lose and it may just be the agent. In most cases (in most states) even the buyer's agent is working for the seller, because he's the one paying the tab. Some states have tried the concept of the "Buyer's Agent", but that works to varying degrees.

Sure, there are cases where the listing _agency_ will do both ends of the deal, but generally not the same agent. I don't think I'd be happy on the buyer's end of that, at all.

Reply to
krw

They're still working for the seller.

I never said they didn't exist. Get your glasses fixed.

Reply to
krw

That's what I would do. As a buyer I'd no more use the seller's agent than the seller's attorney. That's nutz.

Reply to
krw

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.