| Author |
Message |
    
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2356
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:04 pm: | 
|
Is a house seller liable for repairs when she misrepresented or under-represented the condition of the house? We came across a very bad condition that our seller definitely would have known about. Was she obligated to notify us?
I have a call in to my realtor and my lawyer, but I'm interested in what folks here think.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
algebra2
Citizen
Username: Algebra2
Post Number: 1700
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:11 pm: |
|
Yes, I think they have to disclose it. That was my understanding when we bought. |
C Bataille
Citizen
Username: Nakaille
Post Number: 1665
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:13 pm: |
|
Isn't that what you hire a house inspector for? I'd think the liability might be with the person who did your inspection, if anywhere. I think the disclosure liability is very limited here in NJ.
Cathy |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4943
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:15 pm: |
|
Look at your disclosure form. This is the key I think anyway. One house in our neighborhood sold and the disclosure form didn't disclose water problems in the basement and a suit and settlement resulted.
I don't know how much information other than the disclosure form requires the seller is required to volunteer. If he/she lied about it or hid the condition that may be another story.
So Tom, you discovered the bodies in the basement?
|
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2358
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:19 pm: |
|
My wife thinks there's a good chance we can hold the seller liable. I tend to think we willingly took a risk, but then again, this isn't just a case of a boiler failing soon after the sale.
The seller had left a poster stapled to the wall. I finally got around to removing it and found a crude wooden board under the poster. I removed that and found a gaping hole in the sheetrock wall. The hole led to the soffit under the roof, where there is a hole, so now there is a hole leading from the attic room to the outside.
We're feeling like we're living in the movie "The Money Pit".
I'll see if I can find the documents, but I wouldn't be surprised to find something in the inspector's agreement that says he is not responsible for finding all faults and flaws.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2359
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:20 pm: |
|
Right, I forgot about the disclosure form! On it, the seller lists all known defects. She left this one out, so she does seem liable at this point.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4944
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:38 pm: |
|
Tom, as a guess it sounds like you have/had squirrels who ate through the sofit and someone went through wall to poison the little SOBs.
From you initial post I thought you had found that termites had eaten half the main girt or something equally catastrophic.
The repairs for this are fairly easy and inexpensive. It hardly sounds like something worth the cost and hassle of suing over, at least in my opinion. |
Handygirl
Citizen
Username: Handygirl
Post Number: 23
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:58 pm: |
|
Home inspectors generally have very broad disclaimers in their contracts. I believe that you would have to prove gross negligence on the part of the inspector to hold him/her liable for anything missed during the inspection. It sucks, but otherwise I can't imagine why anyone would choose to assume the risk of inspecting some of these old homes if they could be held legally/financially responsible for the infinite number of defects that could arise down the road post-purchase. It wouldn't be a fair outcome for the inspector, who generally spends 2-5 hours total in a house during an inspection.
Generally, I think that we do assume the risk for most things in NJ, although check the Seller's disclosure carefully. If the Seller lied in the disclosure, you will likely have a cause of action. For example, I believe that one of the questions pertains to water in the basement. If the seller says that he/she has no knowledge of water in the basement, and you find that they called the plumber three times the year before you moved in due to flooding...
As for the "all known defects" language in the disclosure form, you would need to find out what exactly qualifies as a "defect" under NJ law. Not every defect can qualify as a "defect" for purposes of the Seller's disclosure, or the Seller could potentially be on the hook for everything that the Buyer could drum up.
Handygirl
|
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 439
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 3:00 pm: |
|
We went after our inspector about 9 months after we closed, it was a long process but he finally agreed to settle and paid for the cost of the repair. |
Lizziecat
Citizen
Username: Lizziecat
Post Number: 189
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 3:29 pm: |
|
Licensed home inspectors are required to carry errors and omissions insurance. In addition, licensed home inspectors are required to provide clients with a contract to be read and signed prior to the inspection. As of this May, all home inspectors in New Jersey will need to meet fairly rigorous standards in order to be licensed, and it will be illegal for non-licensed persons to perform home inspections. A home inspector will not rip out walls or boards during the course of an inspection, and the contract will state as much. Hopefully, you used a licensed home inspector. I agree with Bobk, that it would be a waste of time to sue in your case. Old houses do seem to be money pits, but it does get better after you've been living there for a few years. |
Handygirl
Citizen
Username: Handygirl
Post Number: 24
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 3:48 pm: |
|
Sylad,
I'm glad that you had a good outcome in your case, although, to be fair, just because your home inspector chose to settle and pay for the repair doesn't mean that you would have won had your case gone to court. It just means that the home inspector (or his/her insurance company) decided that it was less expensive in the long run to pay you for the repair than to litigate. There is no guarantee when filing a suit that the other side will settle, even if it would be in the inspector's financial best interest to do so (unless, of course, the case against him/her is phenomenal). Some people would rather pay twice in legal fees what they could settle for, on principal, simply because they feel like they did nothing wrong. So, the question then becomes, does Tom actually have a case against the inspector (ie, did the inspector committ the level of negligence required by law)?
Handygirl
|
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2367
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 3:53 pm: |
|
The inspector told us he wouldn't move ANYTHING to do the inspection. Perhaps this is standard. In fact, it seems quite understandable. So it's not surprising he didn't knock on the silly decorative posters stapled to the walls.
In the scheme of all the repairs we're doing, this repair may end up being very small, so as bobk says, we may end up letting this go.
But my wife is more litigious than I am, so we'll see. She recently won her second small claims case, this time against a piano mover who damaged the piano when we moved it in. They stonewalled all of her communications. So when they got the notice from the court, they sent her a check.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4947
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 4:13 pm: |
|
The question is how did both the inspector and you miss the hole in the sofit? Most inspectors use binoculars to look at the roof, if they don't climb up and check it out. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2369
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 4:15 pm: |
|
The inspector did see the hole in the soffit. We later had to pay an exterminator to put a mesh there that lets squirrels and raccoons get out but not back in. That's still there.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4949
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 4:23 pm: |
|
So all you have to do is repair the hole in the sheetrock. No big deal. If it is less than a foot across you wan buy a patch, mud over it, sand and paint. Larger than that you will have to cut out a section and replace it, again, not a major deal. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2371
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 4:25 pm: |
|
bobk, you're right, as always. This seems like too small a deal to make something out of, even if it's a matter of principle.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 2067
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 4:30 pm: |
|
Well, since the soffit hole was found & repaired, I'm thinking you don't have a case. The attic repair may have been half-assed, but at least it was there.
We learned (the hard way) that sometimes it's better to get cash from the seller rather than let them pay for a repair. They are going to do the cheapest job possible. Since a hole in the wall doesn't require a permit & inspection, you can't really say that they didn't do the repair, known or unknown to you.
Our seller had to replace the sill plates under the garage. They did, but, 7 years later, it needs to be done again. Next time we buy a house, I will specify materials to be used in repairs or get the cash & have it done myself. |
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 441
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 8:18 am: |
|
Handygirl...The inspector agreed with me that he was at fault and agreed to pay a % of the repair cost. After several attempts and four or five months he did not pay me, so I had our laywer send a letter, within two weeks the check arrived. |
Handygirl
Citizen
Username: Handygirl
Post Number: 26
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 10:12 am: |
|
Thanks for the additional info Sylad. I get what happened now - didn't mean to jump to conclusions based on your previous post  Glad that it ended well.
Handygirl
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page