patrick.net

@tatupu70

I think it is more nuanced than that. The problem arises when communities need to make decisions on how certain things will be done. For example, look at the teaching of evolution and alternate theories in schools.

What is the correct framework to decide that? If you take it by majority vote, many school districts would no longer teach it. This runs counter to the experts in biology and genetics. I would argue that the decision has been made that some peoples opinions are not as valid as other people.

So my position is sometimes my opinion is more valid than yours. Sometimes mine is significantly less valid than yours. My opinion is not all opinions are equal valid. This probably goes against the opinion of most people, but I am arguing that it should be a more wildly held opinion. I hope I manage to convince you of this.

I need to go do some work!

Oliver

99.9% of houses are architecturally insignificant. In fact, some famous architects choose to live in insignificant houses for one reason or another. Architectural significance is about the last thing most people look for.

Floor plans change with time, house size, and societal needs. In the 1950s and 1960s, the kitchen was a little room where the woman did her work. The man building the house didn't want to devote much space and money to it, so it was small and closed off. Now, it is a social room & a place where the family can spend time with mom who works during the day. Smaller houses may benefit from a closed off kitchen where the walls and cabinets add storage space. In bigger houses, the space is not so critical, and so they open it up for a nice airy light-filled and connected feeling.

When looking at newer apartment complexes, the manager always comes out and shows you a bunch of floor plans. The average person can look at this and see which plan fits their lifestyle the best. One reason that the new complex does this is that they know that their new floor plan fits contemporary expectations, and people will like them.

oliverks1 says

First of all thank you to leoj707 for providing the nice whiskey example.

As much as I like Islay malts, the best whiskey ever is "North of Scotland" bottled by Scott's.

Anyone who disagrees either:
1. Has not tried it
-or-
2. Is wrong

if it's not Scottish, it's craaaapp!

@Nomograph,

A sketch of the proof is as follows. It can be a little hard to write proofs with only text, so please let me know if something is unclear.

Let I = R - Q (or the Irrationals are the Reals take away the Rationals). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_number.

The set Q is countably infinite (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_number#Properties). The diagram shows an example mapping of the positive integers onto the positive rationals. So the rational must be the same size or smaller than the integers. As the integers are included in the rationals they must be the same size set. Z is countable (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countable_set). Hence Q is countable.

Let (a,b) be the set of real numbers x such that a

Let (a,b) be the set of real numbers x such that a

@Nomograph,

Sorry for all these posts but the less than sign was causing problems.

A sketch of the proof is as follows. It can be a little hard to write proofs with only text, so please let me know if something is unclear.

Let I = R - Q (or the Irrationals are the Reals take away the Rationals). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_number.

The set Q is countably infinite (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_number#Properties). The diagram shows an example mapping of the positive integers onto the positive rationals. So the rational must be the same size or smaller than the integers. As the integers are included in the rationals they must be the same size set. Z is countable (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countable_set). Hence Q is countable.

Let (a,b) be the set of real numbers x such that a less than x less than b.

Referencing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebesgue_measure

The Lebesgue measure of (a,b) = b-a by property 1.

We want to show the assertion that any countably infinite set has Lebesgue measure zero.

This can be seeing by constructing a covering over the countable set. Chose a positive number e. Let your countable numbers be called Q= {q1, q2, q3, ...}. Let your covering be

(q1-e/4,q1+e4) U (q2-e/8,q2+e/8) U (q3-e/16,q+e/16) ...

This covering has Lebesgue measure of no more than e (it might be less due to overlaps) by property 2 and a little work.

As Q is contained inside our covering the Lebesgue measure of Q must be less than e by property 5.

As our choice of e was any positive real, the measure of Q must be less than any positive real. However property 4 states all measures must be greater than or equal to zero. So the measure of Q is zero.

This shows that the measure of countably infinite sets are zero.

The actual "mass" of the rational numbers is nothing under Lebesgue measure. This is surprising as it says that the numbers we know and love really insignificant in comparison to all the Reals (there are other results that show this without using measures). For example the measure of (0,1) is 1. (0,1) contains an infinite number of rationals, but they take up no space.

Oliver

I don't see what all the belly aching about floor plans is over. First, to get a PROFESSIONALLY done floor plan made up costs money. I'm not talking about rough sketches, but the types of floor plans they hand oout at new developments and large apartment complexes. Those are all professionally made. And most peopel don't really care. They would rather see photos.

@leoj707

I'll take your word for it. I might even try a bottle, can you give me an estimate of how much it should cost?

What should I be looking for in it?

Oliver

I think I paid just under 200 for my last bottle. I got it at klwines.com. I have got it from bevmo before, but I think they don't have any more bottles.
http://www.klwines.com/detail.asp?sku=1018111

Smooth, light a little sweet and very complex it is an excelent scotch from nose to finish, and the finish is verrryyy long. Probably the longest finish I have ever experinced. You could probably find better tasting notes.

It is the only bottle I have tasted in the 200+ range that I thought was worth the price.

corntrollio says

gameisrigged says

Disclaimers do not prevent lawsuits.

Proper disclosure does. This is all about disclosure.

The lawsuit thing is a red herring. It's all about salesmanship.

You know nothing of the law. Pretty much the first thing you would learn in law school is that all the disclaimers in the world aren't going to protect you. Do you think the warning labels McDonald's has on their coffee cups now, "Warning! Coffee is hot", is going to ensure that they never get sued again? Best you can do is increase your odds of winning the case; you will not guarantee that you don't get sued. A warning label does not automatically bar lawsuits. The only sure fire way to prevent lawsuits is to refrain from engaging in any kind of behavior that you could be sued for.

Get real. You can't just shrug off liability by saying, "Uh, gee - we warned 'em".

YesYNot says

Anyone selling a house for $200K or up can spare an hour to create a floor plan.

Anyone buying a house for $200K or up can spare 10 minutes to go look at the house.

StoutFiles says

gameisrigged says

Why can't you just have your realtor call the listing agent and ask?

Perhaps I don't want a buyer's agent? If that did work it'd just be another thing keeping realtors in the driver's seat.

Then call the listing agent yourself. Did you break your finger?

@Nomograph

I attempted to provide a proof for you. You said, "I see nothing about Lebesgue measure that makes most numbers irrational." You came back with the sarcastic comment, "Congratulations, you've arrived at a trivial solution. At least it only took you three posts to do it." This was a proof you requested. A proof I spent time trying to formulate in a readable manner. Writing is not my strong point, so the effort involved was considerable.

I did apologize that my using the less than sign confused the website. I did not realize that was going to happen. It took two attempts for me to understand where the problem was. I apologize again, I did not mean to clutter the board with attempted posts.

At this stage I see no point in responding to you. I can only hope that time may teach you that passion infects both science and math, as it does art and music. One day you may also discover that art and music are not so subjective, but I am not going to hold my breath.

Good luck, and Viva le floor plan!

Oliver

oliverks1 says

@Nomograph

I attempted to provide a proof for you. You said, "I see nothing about Lebesgue measure that makes most numbers irrational." You came back with the sarcastic comment, "Congratulations, you've arrived at a trivial solution. At least it only took you three posts to do it." This was a proof you requested. A proof I spent time trying to formulate in a readable manner. Writing is not my strong point, so the effort involved was considerable.

I did apologize that my using the less than sign confused the website. I did not realize that was going to happen. It took two attempts for me to understand where the problem was. I apologize again, I did not mean to clutter the board with attempted posts.

At this stage I see no point in responding to you. I can only hope that time may teach you that passion infects both science and math, as it does art and music. One day you may also discover that art and music are not so subjective, but I am not going to hold my breath.

gameisrigged says

YesYNot says

Anyone selling a house for $200K or up can spare an hour to create a floor plan.

Anyone buying a house for $200K or up can spare 10 minutes to go look at the house.

I looked at about 5 houses before buying one. It took much longer than 10 minutes per house. Maybe if you happen to live next door and are a realtor, you can look at a house in 10 minutes. Seriously, how do you figure 10 minutes?

Plus, only 1 person sells a particular house. Multiple people look at it, so it is more efficient for the seller to spend the time. Plus the seller gets the benefit of a higher price. A typical listing on ebay for a $200 product has a more detailed and informative listing than the average real estate listing. For whatever reason, the realtors doing the listing either think there is some benefit to withholding information or they are terribly lazy.

You answered your own question. If they showed you the floor plan, you wouldn't be interested.

gameisrigged says

You know nothing of the law. Pretty much the first thing you would learn in law school is that all the disclaimers in the world aren't going to protect you. Do you think the warning labels McDonald's has on their coffee cups now, "Warning! Coffee is hot", is going to ensure that they never get sued again? Best you can do is increase your odds of winning the case; you will not guarantee that you don't get sued. A warning label does not automatically bar lawsuits. The only sure fire way to prevent lawsuits is to refrain from engaging in any kind of behavior that you could be sued for.

To the contrary, you are misunderstanding that the law is highly context-dependent and fact-dependent. You are also comparing a products liability/negligence case to a disclosure about real estate case, which is highly misguided. Trying to generalize from a coffee case to real estate is not a very good example.

The standards of negligence for product liability do not apply here. This is not about having a generic warning label for a product. This is about having a drawing that indicates the general location of rooms in the house, without necessarily being to scale. The characteristics of that type of drawing can easily be disclosed in the real estate context and is not at all comparable to a warning label. It is not misleading, it is not fraudulent, and it is not misrepresentative. All you're saying is that an inadequate warning label doesn't protect you from bad design, but that's a poor legal argument to apply in this case which involves legal disclosure. You can sell someone a crappy house as long as you disclose that it's crappy, but you can't do that with a dangerously designed product in the same manner without additional thought.

By the way, if you've been to law school, you'd know that that's not the first thing you'd learn in law school. At any good law school, you'd learn far more about theory and very little about practical things.

leoj707 says

As much as I like Islay malts, the best whiskey ever is "North of Scotland" bottled by Scott's.

Definitely haven't had that one, but there are a variety of $200 bottles I haven't tasted yet (at least the 1964, which seems to be commonly available, appears to be in that price range). Michael Jackson thought it lacked dimension, although according to one other review I saw, they liked it.

By the way, this might be one of the rare cases you can get a bottle for cheaper than K&L, but that's a great shop.

corntrollio says

To the contrary, you are misunderstanding that the law is highly context-dependent and fact-dependent. You are also comparing a products liability/negligence case to a disclosure about real estate case, which is highly misguided. Trying to generalize from a coffee case to real estate is not a very good example.

Utter nonsense. "The law is highly context-dependent and fact-dependent". That is virtually a truism. You just said absolutely nothing. The law is fact dependent? Gee, ya think? (That's sarcasm, son).

I am not making any comparison of one area of law to another. I am explaining a general principle to you, one which obviously went straight over your head.

WARNINGS. DO. NOT. AUTOMATICALLY. PREVENT. LAWSUITS.

That is a general principle. One you might want to memorize right now. If you think a warning is an automatic bar to a lawsuit, then you know absolutely nothing of the law. Period.

The standards of negligence for product liability do not apply here. This is not about having a generic warning label for a product.

So then you are arguing that since it is a drawing rather than a "product", that general principles of law do not apply? That's horseshit.

This is about having a drawing that indicates the general location of rooms in the house, without necessarily being to scale. The characteristics of that type of drawing can easily be disclosed in the real estate context and is not at all comparable to a warning label. It is not misleading, it is not fraudulent, and it is not misrepresentative.

The fact that you keep repeating something over and over does not render it true.

WARNINGS. DO. NOT. AUTOMATICALLY. PREVENT. LAWSUITS.

All you're saying is that an inadequate warning label doesn't protect you from bad design, but that's a poor legal argument to apply in this case which involves legal disclosure. You can sell someone a crappy house as long as you disclose that it's crappy, but you can't do that with a dangerously designed product in the same manner without additional thought.

Wow, talk about misguided. You are making a completely inapt comparison. Disclosing a flaw in a house that you are RESELLING is not the same as CREATING a drawing that purports to represent the internal layout of a house.

A better comparison would be a builder who built a house with an unstable foundation and then tried to sell it by saying, "I make no guarantees about the stability of the foundation". Nope, can't do it. That builder could be sued, and probably would lose. Disclosure does not automatically protect you.

YesYNot says

I looked at about 5 houses before buying one. It took much longer than 10 minutes per house. Maybe if you happen to live next door and are a realtor, you can look at a house in 10 minutes. Seriously, how do you figure 10 minutes?

5 houses? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!! Seriously? You're bitching that you had to look at 5 houses? Try 100 houses, and maybe you would get my interest. Sheesh, talk about "terribly lazy".

Look, if you can't eliminate a house in 10 minutes, you aren't going about it right. If you want to buy it, by all means you should spend WAY more than 10 minutes. You should do a complete inspection at the very minimum. But if you don't like it, why would you spend more than 10 minutes looking at it?

Plus, only 1 person sells a particular house. Multiple people look at it, so it is more efficient for the seller to spend the time. Plus the seller gets the benefit of a higher price. A typical listing on ebay for a $200 product has a more detailed and informative listing than the average real estate listing. For whatever reason, the realtors doing the listing either think there is some benefit to withholding information or they are terribly lazy.

I don't think that's a great comparison. If I'm buying something on eBay, I need to know every last detail, because that is the only chance I will have to find out about it before committing to the purchase. If I'm buying a house, I'm sure as hell not going to commit to buying it based only on the MLS listing. I'm going to go look at it, have it inspected, etc.

And I really don't see how posting a floor plan is going to get anyone a higher price.

You know, I just don't understand all the resistance for posting a floorplan or a photo of a floorplan sketch on a damn napkin is all about.

Hell, most people who buy a car, which may be expensive for sure but most likely no more than 1/10th the cost of a home purchase, expect some good detailed description of what they are thinking of purchasing. As far as a new car is concerned, yep, the glossier the magazines and brochures, the more dimensions provided, close ups of spaces, finishes, and for gear heads all the stats, etc. the better. If one expects all of this when shopping/ purchasing say a 50K car, then why is is so difficult to come up with a 20 minute mock up of a floor plan for a home that may cost 500K or 1,5K? I mean really, jeeesh, just sayin'.

And all that crap about being sued for posting a floorplan drawing is bull. I have seen hundreds, perhaps thousands of homes advertised with a floor plan. Most come with some form of disclaimer. I seriously doubt this practice used by some of your better realtors would still be in play if they were getting their pants sued off.

The only reason not to advertise a floor plan is if your home has a crummy one to begin with or if you have a lazy realtor. Like I said before, many can't even take a good set of photos for homes even in the million plus range where the seller is putting out 60K or more to complete a deal.

Buster says

Hell, most people who buy a car, which may be expensive for sure but most likely no more than 1/10th the cost of a home purchase, expect some good detailed description of what they are thinking of purchasing. As far as a new car is concerned, yep, the glossier the magazines and brochures, the more dimensions provided, close ups of spaces, finishes, and for gear heads all the stats, etc. the better. If one expects all of this when shopping/ purchasing say a 50K car, then why is is so difficult to come up with a 20 minute mock up of a floor plan for a home that may cost 500K or 1,5K? I mean really, jeeesh, just sayin'.

What on earth are you talking about? I'm holding an ad from a car dealer in my hand right now. It has the name of the car, a small stock photo (only one), and it says "$3000 off MSRP" That is the ONLY information given about the car. It doesn't even give the price. MLS listings give FAR more information than that.

People are willing to drive across town to go look at cars with almost no information, but you want to be spoon-fed everything about a house before you can bother yourself to hop in the car and go look at it?

gameisrigged says

I am not making any comparison of one area of law to another. I am explaining a general principle to you, one which obviously went straight over your head.

WARNINGS. DO. NOT. AUTOMATICALLY. PREVENT. LAWSUITS.

Please give a real world example of when someone was sued and lost for providing an imperfect floor plan that clearly stated it was an imperfect floor plan. Otherwise, please stop spouting this nonsense. Might as well take 0 pictures because they could be not 100% accurate after a couple months. Might as well not list sq ft at all because you might have been misinformed in the past and be off by a sq ft. Better yet, just don't sell your house, board it up and hide because someone might see you and sue you.

You're being crazy and belittling people for not being paranoid like you. No one is going to sue you if it's clearly there on the sketch. You can even mention it again when they come to the house. You can make them sign a paper saying they acknowledge the sketch at imperfect. Jesus, just stop being crazy. The topic is "Is a sketched floor plan useful", not "oh no I can be sued for this hurrghgghhh"

Buster says

You know, I just don't understand all the resistance for posting a floorplan or a photo of a floorplan sketch on a damn napkin is all about.

Neither do I.

StoutFiles says

You're being crazy and belittling people for not being paranoid like you. No one is going to sue you if it's clearly there on the sketch. You can even mention it again when they come to the house. You can make them sign a paper saying they acknowledge the sketch at imperfect. Jesus, just stop being crazy. The topic is "Is a sketched floor plan useful", not "oh no I can be sued for this hurrghgghhh"

Wow, what a well-reasoned, rational argument. Do you always flip out when you start losing a debate?

gameisrigged says

Wow, what a well-reasoned, rational argument. Do you always flip out when you start losing a debate?

It's not a debate, you've been attacking every commenter with this nonsense. Are you going to provide an example of someone being sued for an imperfect, clearly labeled floor plan or not?

Here is an online brochure for a mercedes; Price: $49,000. http://www.mbusa.com/vcm/MB/DigitalAssets/pdfmb/brochures/2011_ESedan_Wagon.pdf

I could pick out any new car, all come with a 10+ page glossy brochure. For a home 10x, 20x or 30x as much? Perhaps a one pager.

Buster says

I could pick out any new car, all come with a 10+ page glossy brochure. For a home 10x, 20x or 30x as much? Perhaps a one pager.

Bro, the hard working RE professionals already DO put in a lot of work. It is hard to find the caps lock key and I trust anyone that can wade through all 104+ keys to find it. And spell check...my god, you'd have to search through a menu or something. Besides, typing a 3 sentence description shows plenty of effort, and requiring proper spelling or grammar would just put RE professionals out of work! Let's not get greedy now.

Buster says

Here is an online brochure for a mercedes; Price: $49,000. http://www.mbusa.com/vcm/MB/DigitalAssets/pdfmb/brochures/2011_ESedan_Wagon.pdf

I could pick out any new car, all come with a 10+ page glossy brochure. For a home 10x, 20x or 30x as much? Perhaps a one pager.

Faulty analogy. That is a brochure from the MANUFACTURER, not the dealer. Home manufacturers provide a similar level of detail. For example:

http://www.kbhome.com/Plan~PlanID~00100206-230.1727.aspx

StoutFiles says

gameisrigged says

Wow, what a well-reasoned, rational argument. Do you always flip out when you start losing a debate?

It's not a debate, you've been attacking every commenter with this nonsense. Are you going to provide an example of someone being sued for an imperfect, clearly labeled floor plan or not?

Gee, another stellar argument from you. Seems like YOU are the one on the attack, not me. You have attacked about 5 different people in this thread, just because they didn't agree with your petulant whining about floorplans.

Here's a better idea. YOU provide an example of someone who was barred from filing a lawsuit because there was a warning label on a floorplan saying it "might not be accurate".

Disclaimers don't prevent lawsuits.

gameisrigged says

Gee, another stellar argument from you. Seems like YOU are the one on the attack, not me. You have attacked about 5 different people in this thread, just because they didn't agree with your petulant whining about floorplans.

Right, that's debating. My view is an opinion that I try to defend. I could be wrong, floor planes could be killing house sales everywhere so they're rarely listed. By debating the issue I learn more; I did learn that withholding that information helps realtors, that was something I didn't consider. I'm not shutting down conversation, I'm inviting it. That is why I started the thread, and why the title is a question.

You are stating your stance as a fact, reminding everyone about that fact, but I see no facts. I see nothing to believe anyone will be sued for providing a good faith sketch. If you would like to say that your stance is just your opinion, then I won't question it further. If it's a fact, I just want to see one example to back up that fact.

gameisrigged says

Here's a better idea.

You couldn't provide ONE example. Thanks for playing.

gameisrigged says

YOU provide an example of someone who was barred from filing a lawsuit because there was a warning label on a floorplan saying it "might not be accurate".

"Might not be accurate"? It wouldn't be accurate, it's a sketch. They need to address that, not try to mislead the buyer. It's a good faith sketch, not a sales trick. I still believe we live in a world where people who provide extra information in good faith, while still covering the bases with a clear disclaimer, will not be sued for it.

Luckily, you agree. You would shutdown my entire argument with one example. You seem so adamant this is true, but can't spend one minute to go look up one and paste the link.

gameisrigged says

Disclaimers don't prevent lawsuits.

Well, in this case they obviously do.

Wow ! All I wanted was Sharks with #&*^$# Laser Beams !

gameisrigged says

WARNINGS. DO. NOT. AUTOMATICALLY. PREVENT. LAWSUITS.

Repeating obvious and strawman statements doesn't really help explain the law to people. Absolutely nothing absolutely prevents lawsuits because you could get sued when you're completely in the right -- but you can do plenty to mitigate them and to use the law against them. People who are paralyzed in the face of any minimal risk, as you seem to be suggesting, usually don't do very well in business.

I've never said the disclosure would "automatically" "bar" a lawsuit -- in fact it would be stupid to say so. I'm saying it's a perfectly acceptable risk. When you make a fact-dependent and context-dependent analysis, you decide it based on risks and decide whether the risk is acceptable. Simply repeating stock phrases doesn't help.

What I gave is a reasoned opinion that is based on reality and facts. Yes, you might get sued by some retard whose case will be dismissed immediately, fine. You can get sued for all kinds of stupid reasons that get dismissed -- simply saying "you could get sued" is not helpful. Prisoners start handwritten lawsuits on notebook paper that are meritless too -- should you spend a meaningful amount of time protecting against that too? Absolutely not.

Similarly, the fears of realtors here is really unfounded. This is a pure disclosure issue, and any minimal suit can likely be easily dismissed, and if one were to go forward, a precedential decision in favor of realtors would likely result.

Moreover, on incredibly expensive houses, realtors provide floorplans all the time. Look at a site like SocketSite. I haven't heard of any lawsuits over these.

gameisrigged says

A better comparison would be a builder who built a house with an unstable foundation and then tried to sell it by saying, "I make no guarantees about the stability of the foundation". Nope, can't do it. That builder could be sued, and probably would lose. Disclosure does not automatically protect you.

No, that's a crappy example. The builder has an implicit warranty. When I sell you my house, I don't necessarily have one.

You seem unwilling to have a reasoned discussion and instead prefer to repeat useless phrases over and over that don't really say anything. Good for you, but I'm done.

gameisrigged says

Look, if you can't eliminate a house in 10 minutes, you aren't going about it right.

You can't drive to a house, wait for a Realtor, and drive home in 10 minutes unless you pretty much live next door. Get real.

StoutFiles says

Right, that's debating. My view is an opinion that I try to defend. I could be wrong, floor planes could be killing house sales everywhere so they're rarely listed. By debating the issue I learn more; I did learn that withholding that information helps realtors, that was something I didn't consider. I'm not shutting down conversation, I'm inviting it. That is why I started the thread, and why the title is a question.

You are stating your stance as a fact, reminding everyone about that fact, but I see no facts. I see nothing to believe anyone will be sued for providing a good faith sketch. If you would like to say that your stance is just your opinion, then I won't question it further. If it's a fact, I just want to see one example to back up that fact.

That's hogwash. First you say it's not a debate, then you say it is. The problem is, you obviously can't stand to LOSE a debate, so you resort to flipping out and posting gibberish. I have made perfectly lucid points, to which you responded:

"You're being crazy and belittling people for not being paranoid like you."

"No one is going to sue you if it's clearly there on the sketch."

"Jesus, just stop being crazy."

"The topic is "Is a sketched floor plan useful", not "oh no I can be sued for this hurrghgghhh"

Sounds like "stating things as facts" to me (albeit nonsensical things). So wait, what was it again that I am allegedly doing which you are not? Oh, nothing? That's what I thought.

Fact is, you attacked 5 people, which YOU call a "debate". But then you assaulted me with gibberish, and claim I'm not debating. Yeah, whatever...

"Might not be accurate"? It wouldn't be accurate, it's a sketch. They need to address that, not try to mislead the buyer. It's a good faith sketch, not a sales trick. I still believe we live in a world where people who provide extra information in good faith, while still covering the bases with a clear disclaimer, will not be sued for it.

You may very well BELIEVE that we live in a world where disclaimers are a magic wand against lawsuits, Dorothy, but we are not in Kansas anymore, and disclaimers do not automatically protect you. You have a duty against negligence, and simply disavowing responsibility for your actions will not absolve you of that responsibility.

I could give you tons of examples of this GENERAL PRINCIPLE, but there's no point, because no matter what example I give, you will simply parrot: "No fair! That's different!". And then you will whine at me for "saying the same thing over and over".

We live in a world where anyone can and will sue you for any ridiculous reason just to try to make a buck.

corntrollio says

Repeating obvious and strawman statements doesn't really help explain the law to people.

It's not a strawman, and unfortunately I have to keep repeating it because you keep trying to confuse the issue.

Absolutely nothing absolutely prevents lawsuits because you could get sued when you're completely in the right -- but you can do plenty to mitigate them and to use the law against them. People who are paralyzed in the face of any minimal risk, as you seem to be suggesting, usually don't do very well in business.

Strawman. I suggested no such thing.

You are neglecting a very important point. There is no reason to take any risk if there is no reward for that risk. If I ran a convenience store, I could take the risk of suspending sharp knives from the ceiling. They probably wouldn't fall and injure anyone, but there is no point to taking that risk, because it would not help my business in any way. On the other hand, if I want to sell milk at my store, there is a small risk of someone becoming ill from drinking spoiled milk. However, the REWARD is that I would profit from the sale of the milk, so it is worth taking the risk.

Now, have you ever heard of a house not having any offers because the listing agent didn't post a floor plan? I never have. In fact, agent can sell houses just fine without posting floor plans. So there is absolutely no reason to take any risk at all, because there is absolutely nothing to be gained.

I've never said the disclosure would "automatically" "bar" a lawsuit -- in fact it would be stupid to say so.

Yes you did. I wrote:

"Disclaimers do not prevent lawsuits."

and you wrote:

"Proper disclosure does. This is all about disclosure."

i.e., you made the claim that proper disclosure prevents lawsuits. I am merely disputing that claim.

YesYNot says

gameisrigged says

Look, if you can't eliminate a house in 10 minutes, you aren't going about it right.

You can't drive to a house, wait for a Realtor, and drive home in 10 minutes unless you pretty much live next door. Get real.

Please quote where I wrote the words: "Drive to a house, waite for a realtor, and drive home" (Not including right here, of course).

gameisrigged says

Now, have you ever heard of a house not having any offers because the listing agent didn't post a floor plan? I never have. In fact, agent can sell houses just fine without posting floor plans. So there is absolutely no reason to take any risk at all, because there is absolutely nothing to be gained.

That's poor logic. There are not only two important outcomes: house sells or house doesn't sell. Two more obvious outcomes are time to sale and price of sale. If presenting a floor plan decreases time to sale and/or increases price of sale then there is obviously something to be gained.

There is basically a zero chance of losing a lawsuit by presenting a floor plan with a proper disclosure, so there is basically zero risk.

If you think you could lose a lawsuit by giving a floor plan, answer this question from the judge--how were you harmed? Didn't you tour the house before buying it?

gameisrigged says

That's hogwash. First you say it's not a debate, then you say it is. The problem is, you obviously can't stand to LOSE a debate, so you resort to flipping out and posting gibberish.

I'm not debating you, just trying to get a fact out of you. Then we might have a debate. You'd have the same argument with saying "floorplans spawn hell demons", in which you repeat it over and over while providing no evidence to back it up.

gameisrigged says

I could give you tons of examples of this GENERAL PRINCIPLE

Of someone being sued for something, in general? It's not like I'm trying to trick you, you could post an example of anything if it makes it easier for you, providing it fits the criteria of my example.

1) Disclaimer is clear to the buyer.
2) Disclaimer is on information not needed and only exists to help the buyer (and because of this, the seller).

gameisrigged says

In fact, agent can sell houses just fine without posting floor plans. So there is absolutely no reason to take any risk at all, because there is absolutely nothing to be gained.

With that logic, there should be zero internet listings. Realtors would still sell houses regardless because of the demand for houses.

gameisrigged says

Please quote where I wrote the words: "Drive to a house, waite for a realtor, and drive home" (Not including right here, of course).

When arguing a point that looking at houses is not a time consuming process, we must factor in the time to make an appointment, drive there, wait, look at the house, listen to the Realtor pitching other houses, and drive back. While you may be correct that the actual looking at the house takes 10 inutes, the whole process takes much longer. It would be a process that might not have to happen had a floor plan been provided.

gameisrigged says

That's hogwash. First you say it's not a debate, then you say it is. The problem is, you obviously can't stand to LOSE a debate, so you resort to flipping out and posting gibberish.

I find that being worried about being sued for things is jibberish, so conveyed it as such. You are right though, I have lost for merely talking to you. I have entered a continued discussion with someone who argues the same points to death because he wants to "win". You do realize the topic is a question and I wanted it answered? I wanted to have my question answered, but in an insightful way, not because someone has bombarded the thread with an inaccurate viewpoint and chooses not to back it up in fear they may "lose".

Like corntrollio, I'm walking away as well for the same reasons. One day I hope you see the benefit of actually proving a point instead of everyone leaving because no one wants to talk to you anymore.

::sigh::

Floor plans certainly tell more than just square footage and in many cases are pretty vital depending on who you sell a house to.

For example if you are selling a house to someone that is going to be there 30+ years it might be a good idea to have most major amenities (kitchen, bathroom (w/shower), bedroom etc on one floor. If a elderly person ends up having a house with a shower on the second floor that can be a huge negative going forward. Yes there are stairlift devices (remember Gremlins?)

Can disclaimers prevent lawsuits? Probably not but hardly anything an outright prevent a lawsuit. Not all lawsuits are valid as they are usually just paperwork. Heck not all cases are even heard.

I wouldn't say that not showing a floorplan is shady but if they either outright refuse or if the house is outdated then it raises red flags. If you have something that needs to be fixed knowing the floor plan can dramatically help in getting any work done.

I would also assume that in this market if you really want to sell a house that a floor plan would be given.

It is possible to tell if someone is hiding something. There's a house in NH that has been on the market for years. One thing that is striking is there are no photos of the bathroom. There's a fair reason for it. There used to be but they took them down. Reason being is they pretty much had a outhouse and jerry rigged up a shower adjacent to the house..that's right there is no tub..the photos showed a shower next to shingles!

www.trulia.com/property/3053133296--Red-Oak-Hl-Wentworth-NH-03282

Knowing the floor plan helps for various items. If someone has a pool table they would probably want to know it..same if they have sets of bookcases or a very large bed etc.