Are there any tile and drywall people who can answer this question. I sold a 20+ year old home and now the Buyer is now trying to sue me. I never had a problem or noticed anything wrong when I sold it over 2 years ago.
Thanks,
GC
If it was not maintained by them, keeping the caulk good at the tub and if cracks developed they did not maintain the life is short, so counter sue them for filing a frivilous lawsuit. Did you dislose nothing because there was nothing wrong to you, then dont worry. Go to your courthouse check records to see if they have done this before. It seems to be a common issue, but if their claim is without merit you may collect.
Sounds like they wanted to replace the bathroom tile and are trying to get you to pay for it.
Did they replace it with the same tile and color, no, I bet they realy wanted something different
Or they dont know how to use a shower ! I used to have a rental property and the plaster shower walls had lasted 50 years. These tenants destroyed the walls and rotted the floor in several months. Not only did I evict them, but they ended up paying for the damage. The walls are NOT to be flooded with the shower and the floor is NOT part of the shower. Some people are too stupid to understand that. Heck, my father used to make everyone that showered dry the walls with a towel afterwards. He never had wall problems.
If the house walls were fine when you sold the place, and 2 years later they are complaining, I'd laugh in their face and tell them where to go....
That's what I did, now I'll have to do it small claims because I just got served. Hopefully the judge gets in their a** for filing such a pooh butt claim.
GC
The problem is you must prove your case, if you could get in there and get photos you would learn alot, play their game, offer to settle to get an advance look at their evidence and the bath, then you will know how to plan your defence.
Relax and don't worry about it. Alot of things can happen in two years, they are just "waving their swords" and trolling for some money from a quick out of court settlement. They purchased a 20 y.o home WITHOUT a warranty, so they are out of luck. You can do extensive damage if the grout cracks and it is not repaired, causing water to seep behind the tile, and even if the grout was cracked before the closing, THEIR home inspector should have picked up on it, and had YOU repair the problem, prior to closing. These Turds are S.O.L !!! Tell them you know the Chuckster from N.J. and he said: Put all your energy and money into helping the poor and sick, instead of tying up the court system, because you are going to Fu@kin loose!! (of course ya gotta say this in a Jersey accent for it to be effective) HUGE TIP! Don't loose any sleep and don't give these Idiots one penny of your hard earned money, you did nothing wrong. Trolls are everywhere!
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
I am late on this thread but this line may help you when you go to court.
The life of wallboard behind a properly maintained surface is 20 years plus and maybe longer. If not kept caulked and sealed it can rot out in a year to 18 months. This is 35 plus years of home ownership and 25 plus years of landlord experience speaking.
You should only be held responsible for defects of which you had knowledge that you failed to disclose. Even if a problem existed and you had no knowledge of that problem you are not responsible for losses that occur two years after the sale.
That is the law on the subject. Now it depends on what type of judge you get and which of you portrays the proper respect both to the judge and the other party. Calm, positive and softly but well spoken.
Best wishes!
Colbyt
If you haven't already, you should contact the attorney that handled the closing for you. He or she should be able to get you out of this situation and it may not be as expensive as you might perceive.
Thanks for the support chuckster!!!
If you get a real judge, no problem. If you get some idiot that thinks all sellers are bad people and he want to make right for the world, who knows?
My last house was 35 years old and no problems with the drywall. Nor did any other house on the street. IMO, they are out of luck. Please let us know how you make out.
Is that for standard wallboard or greenboard? Will greenboard stand up to grout leaks longer/better than standard wallboard or is it just for bathroom steam?
Bob
No mention should be made of a settlement at any time, even if it's a ruse to get in the house. A judge hearing that may decide to play Solomon and split the difference - the OP may end up paying through the nose for that ruse.
There really is no reason for the OP to take a look at the current situation. Even if it's a shambles that means nothing to him...unless he knew of the condition prior to the sale and didn't disclose it. It's up to the new owners to prove that he knew, or should have known.
If the new owner has had a contractor look at the bathroom, and that contractor had done work repairing rot behind the tile for the OP, there's a problem.
R
If that degree of maintenance is needed in order to avoid having the wall collapse then there is something wrong with the installation IMO.
I agree on this one, with the proviso, "check with a lawyer"--blanket statements that "the law says 2 years" are always suspect--there are 50 states in the US, each with their own laws, and over a thousand countries that are not the US, each with their own laws, and we do not know where the OP is located.
Huh? There is something called "disclosure", in the US anyway. They _have_ to provide the opposing party copies of or access to their evidence. But if you are at the stage of examining evidence and preparing defenses, then you're really outside the realm of small claims court and you need a lawyer.
They have to prove you knew of the problem and didnt disclose it!
Your in trouble if say you had a contractor repair to cover up the damage, or told a neighbor the shower was bad.
just the fact its bad today doesnt matter, they must prove you knew and didnt tell......
Properly maintained and sealed were the keywords.
Greenboard is always better. Neither will last very long with leaky grout joints. You get either of them wet on a regular basis and they will crumble. Either can fail in less than 2 years with a lack of proper care. Behind the tile it never has a chance to dry with daily water added.
Colbyt
BTW, rebuttal suits by B against A for frivolous lawsuits or "abuse of process" by A againt B can't be heard until after the original case has been heard and after the defendant B has won. I don't think they can even be filed until after those two things. IIUC, it's a policy decision to discourage such suits except in cases where it is worth it to B to expend the extra effort. If they allowed them concurrently with the original lawsuit, almost EVERYONE would file them.
That they waited two years to sue you, if they didn't give you notice of the problem much earlier, will absolutely help you win this lawsuit (which I firmly expect you will win), but it's not enough to make them lose a "frivolous lawsuit" suit. They will have an excuse for not suing earlier, and although it's not good not to sue promptly (look up "laches"), it doesn't make one frivolous if he sues too late to win his case, if he had, forget the exact term, a reasonable? belief? he had a valid claim. It's intentionally hard to win suits for frivolous law suits because public policy is to not discourage the original suit if it there is any merit to it.
IANAL, and any counter examples would be appreciated.
Also, "offers to compromise" are not admissable in court, because it is public policy that disagreements should be settled without going to court. Judges know that some people will settle and pay money etc. even when they were not actually liable. Often this is because it is expensive to hire a lawyer, but even in small claims court, they know that some people don't have the time, make more money working than they would lose by settling.
I'm not saying however that a judge (or in small claims court some states like NY use hearing officers, who iirc are just lawyers who have passed the bar and have some particular minimum level of experience), I'm not saying that someone couldn't be influenced by an offer to settle, but I think it is pretty rare. Judges and lawyers have all spent money themselves and most have had or their close family has had disagreements with house buyers, house sellers, contractors, vendors, stores, and know close-hand that people will offer to settle to make things go away even when they have no legal obligation. Still, I'm not saying the hearing officer can't be influenced by an offer, especially maybe if the offer was for 60 or
90% of what is asked for.More below.
BTW, "should have known" means something more than just "It's my house and I should know everything that goes on in it." This was one of the days I was sleeping in law school, so I can't think of any examples given then, but it refers (maybe amoung other things) to something that one would have seen if only he had looked, and I think he had some duty to look. If you have a retaining wall, that protects a neighbor's property, it's your duty to inspect it once in a while, at least to look to see if it bulging or tipping, or if it needs tuck-pointing, for example. Even if it is the neighbor's interest to inspect your wall for you, he might not be living there. But even if he is living there, I think you still have a duty to inspect your wall or have someone do it, even if you are not living there. Remember, I am not a lawyer and maybe I'm worse than a non-lawyer, because if the rest of you had started law school, you probably would have finished.
Nonetheless, I don't want someone thinking that "should have known" should be taken in its broadest form. There are probably people who feel, "I should have known" even if they had no way to know. I should have given blood when you were sick, even though I was 2000 miles awaay and no one told me you were sick. I should have called, evne though you called 3 days earlier, and normally only call once a week. No. That's not the standard. If you were in your shower and looked at the shower walls and didn't see anything, you're not expected to have x-ray eyes.
If there had been a big flood in the floor above, and yet not that much water showed up in the room where the shower was, maybe you have should have known it went, or might have gone, into the sheetrock. OTOH, if that was 5 years ago and you haven't had any problems, well I don't know, but I'm sure there was no flood to begin with.
Be on time in court. The plaintiff hopes you don't show up and wins by default. This is a Civil matter and the Judge will rule on the "preponderance of evidence". Which argument will tip the scale of justice; so to speak, in favor of one or the other (51% vs 49%).
If you have counted all your "beans" and all is above board, as you say then the lady will have to "prove" you knew about this. You can already "prove" she accepted this home and it's condition. I cannot image her being able to prove you knew about this problem unless something is missing and you say it isn't.
I would not contact this person for any reason or even speak in court until you stand before the Judge. I would also have in hand any documents related to any offers, counter-offers, etc. that took place during the buy / sell period. Have you spouse beside you, to speak if necessary..... tip the scale. Good luck.
Oren
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.