I had some backyard work done a few years back that was done incorrectly,
and eventually cost me thousands to fix. (basically a retaining wall that
was not built to code and was fixed with rebar reenforced
cement pillers on the other side of the wall. The "damn" thing is strong
enough now that is can hold back just about anything but its quite ugly and
if I want to sell the house, I am worried the new owner could down the line
make trouble for me in the event anything else happens?? The fix was done by
a licensed contractor and inspected by city inspectors, not sure if it ever
was sign off as being finished though.
I guess my question is do home inspectors look at just the house, or can he
make trouble for me and start
poking around this structure.
I've been toying with the idea of stuccoing the whole thing as to try and
make it look better...
"Damn thing" -- now that's funny. :-) I love a good pun.
The potential pitfall of hiring a licensed home inspector to look at
your own home (and pointing them specifically to something you're
concerned about) is this: if they find anything and report it to you,
legally you're now privy to all such defects, and would be obliged to
disclose them on the disclosure form that potential buyers would see,
calling attention to something that otherwise you could reasonably
consider as an improvement done to code in accordance with local
ordinances, blah blah.
If, upon home sale it comes up as an inspection note from the buyer's
inspection, it may be best to just deal with it then. However, in all
likelihood, if the retaining wall is performing its intended function
(at least in my state, according to what inspectors have told me) an
inspector cannot make a defect note of it in their report,
and--depending on the wording of the inspection clause of the contract
for purchase, a buyer would likely not be able to use it as leverage
to try to get more money out of ya at closing.
From a marketing perspective, making it prettier wouldn't hurt for
You did the right thing, you fixed the thing correctly and at great
expense. If it were me, I'd skip the expense of extra due diligence
that might exposure me more than it would protect me.
Fellow across the street recently sold his home.
Buyer's inspector found many things to write up -
including dimples where 100 year old siding was nailed.
Seller said "buy it as is" it sold for his price.
We have a strong seller's market.
I'd suggest quick growing vines.
Home infectors (intentional) are the bane of selling home. They can and will
make statements that are wrong and sometimes just ignorant. The last time I
sold a home built in 1999 the home infector said that the bedrooms needed to
be on Arc Fault breakers. I responded not until the 2002 code did arc fault
become a requirement. He decided to go on a campaign with me about it. He
Arizona does have a method of making complaints against licensened
infectors. I have had no joy in getting anything done with any of their
Take the issue up with your listing realtor. Do not go looking for the bear
until you need to.
Ugly how? Slapping stucco on it versus ivy or some other foliage, you can
buy a lotta vines for what the time/materials of stucco might be...
When you settle on a house it becomes the buyers problem. Unless you've
hidden a known defect there's not a lot a buyer can do. It's the hiding
things that gets you into trouble. There's no law against the wall being
ugly but if you know it's a hazard or at risk of causing some sort of
trouble then you'd be wise to be clear about it. Note I'm not saying "tell
them everything" the key is to be judicious with how much truth you blab on
If you've done that sort of work before and have a high confidence you'd be
doing a good job then it might be worth considering. But you'd probably
want to make sure you're doing as good a job as you'd want to put up with
owning. You'd certainly want the same out of someone selling you a house.
Meanwhile, get a few opinions from other people, perhaps a realtor. What
you consider "ugly" might not be that big a deal.
Doubtful, but in our litigeous society, nothing is certain.
Making trouble is not his job, He is to report what he sees and it is up to
the buyer to say "OK, I'll buy it anyway" or use the points that need fixing
as a negotiating stratagy. All you have to do is say, "It sells as is, take
it or leave it" and let them decide. No house is going to be perfect.
Sometimes we accept what is there and it does not bother us, but a little
sprucing up can have a big effect on the potential buyer. It may well be
worth the stucco time.
good and some are not . that's how simple it is. My sister-in-law house
buyer hired an home inspector, he missed some stuff I could not believe.We
just had one done on the house we sold. I think the guy did a good report.
Found some piss ass things. Most of them having to do with 2005 codes but
the house was 1959. basically said this is how it's done now. One grounding
issue with garage sub panel.( I fixed that)other items, I have two back up
offers, he bought it.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.