patrick.net

maybe you should look into a home warranty?

not sure if it covers what you want but I think it can cover some items not found by the inspection.

Isn't that stuff in the disclosures that they give you? I think they are required to answer truthfully or you can break the contract. Sometimes disclosures are available before making a bid and sometimes after.

Polygraph.

joshuatrio says

Polygraph.

LOL... That should be a new service at the Title Company - Polygraph contingency. Buyer to provide list of questions to be asked 2 days prior.

Come on people! One of the main reasons for selling a house is that it costs more to repair than it is worth. Realtors know this as well. They can pretend they know nothing about construction or defects but they see nightmares masquerading as "homes" every day. Lets help Realtors comply with their alleged ethical recommendations. Why don't we polygraph Realtors? I know some Polygraph examiners say there are psychopaths (pretending to be salesmen) who can trick these machines, so lets haul them ALL in for routine scrutiny! I can see the quivering knees now as they answer questions with questions in an attempt to deflect the truth about that rat infested, termite ridden "cozy fixer with open floor plan". HA! Maybe we can have a new Reality show...where a polygraph examiner tries to detect estate agent liars?

First of all, the thumbs down doesn't work (ironic.) It is called buyer beware. There are limits to what can be seen but there are also issues that cannot be seen in the future. A seller is obligated to disclose but they cannot be magicians. It is up to the buyer to stipulate the terms, and if they sign to buy ...and close, then they eat it. End of story.

Buy a new house.

bayview6 says

Buy a new house.

New house is NOT free of any defects.

Inspectors are so hit or miss, your best bet is to be educated on what to look for yourself and hire specific specialties to look at notorious problem areas. I would first make sure my inspector used thermal imaging to scope for water intrusion and termite infestation. I would also obtain mold and radon air testing. Also, if the house is older, I would get a camera snaked into drain lines and have a reputable plumber check things out. Finally, I would also get a licensed electrician in to inspect everything...ESPECIALLY if it's an older house which may have upgraded their panel from aluminum to copper. This all costs a lot more than your standard $200-400 inspection, but it is worth it when you are talking about a few hundred thousand dollar expenditure.

First, you can get a home warranty. I wouldn't, I would just be very sure I now the house's condition and be prepared. The seller will not, and I think should not, be liable for your responsibilities to fully inspect the house before buying. They certainly should disclose what they know and the less they disclose the more suspect.

Secondly, hire a good, reliable, trustworthy, professional inspector and GO WITH HIM on the inspection. Make closing contingent on your satisfaction with the condition of the house after inspection. I bought a 100+ year old house and it was fascinating. I learned a ton. Remember the inspection is not anything other than documenting of the condition of the house. It is not a 'pass/fail'. It is not a guarantee. It is just a detailed documentation. Do not accept the seller's inspection as your own. And if I may say, educate yourself on how houses work and what the systems and structures are. I am not a building inspector but I feel confident I can identify a lot of things on my own.

In essence, buyer beware, inspect well, and after all that if you want to pay for a warranty, fine.

You don't, and newer houses are even less likely to last as well as the life many older houses, may or not have. The best you can do, is buy the MOST House for the LEAST amount of money.

Look for a house that has the most going on for it, with the most potential for what you imagine the house can be. But has flat roofs and or asphalt tiles, and will definitely need a roof job down the road any way.

You should be looking for houses and expecting a litany of things the place will need anyway. The worst you can do, is buy a house that has been "Completely 'UPDATED'", that will most likely mean that old quality and in most cases still functioning and replaced with cheap materials, and many cases this also means. Walls were removed to create an "Open" space, weakening the structure by removing load barring walls. Chinese drywall, IKEA pressed board cabinet kits, with a marble counter top. Sure the stuffs flashy and new and flashy but does nothing to the value or quality of a house like updating structural components, like roof, foundations, additions, Plumbing, electric ect.

I just heard the 1950's wooden framed house that I rented for the last 11 years, and survived a decade of the worst and the best of hurricane seasons. The current owners knocked out much of the center of the house, and created vaulted ceilings, using the existing leak pronged roof. I wouldn't want to be in that house for a thunder storm now.

Find a house and expect problems not to say they should have visible problems, and get it for as low as you can. With the money you should save, you will be able to replace the Roof, upgrade or repair plumbing and still be a head of the game.

Now at first this might sound a little Investor/Speculator, of me. But no, really if that's how they afford to buy houses to rent out. Then why not do the same for the houses that Owner occupiers buy?
You end up with a house that you want that you know is solid and will last another 30 years.

It seems to me, if you expect someone to guarantee quality then you pay a premium for it.
Because they've obviously put some work in it to get it to where they would stand to back it.

ALL defects in the home are ALREADY guaranteed by the TAXPAYER/FED GOV.

By this I mean if something breaks and is too expensive - you walk away and the loan is guaranteed OR they might give you a loan mod IF you qualify (you are hiding money, poor, or are an officially recognized disadavanted group).

So just put down the FHA 3.5% and sleep safely knowing if you need a roof and a sewer line in the same year you can just squat for 3 years for free and then FHA will offer to rent you back your house for cheap or give you a loan mod, etc.

Are you people aware the 'hardship' bs requirement for a loan mod can be CANT AFFORD HOUSE REPAIR - or spent too much $ on house repair (cant afford payment).

Get a loan mod due to the water heater blew. This is REAL people I'm not making it up. they did 400,000+ mods already! 2% loan on reduced principal. GET ONE while you can. If the repairs are real you can document them with receipts and the loan mod might go thru.

I know a lady on maternity leave who got a loan mod(5 year mod) due to income being reduced for a 3 month maternity leave (it shows as medical leave with no end date on paperwork! wweeeee).

Anyway we all voted for this collectively - its what we want. Enjoy it.

toothfairy says

maybe you should look into a home warranty?
not sure if it covers what you want but I think it can cover some items not found by the inspection.

Most home Warranties are not worth the paper they are printed on. They always find some reason why that's not covered. You best bet is to get a good home inspector and steer clear of anyone a Realtor suggests. They have deals set up where I'll steer customers your way if you promise not to find any major faults with the house that could derail a sale. You want the prick home inspector that going to find every little thing that's wrong with the house.

John Bailo says

I was thinking about was something like CarFax.
So HouseFax would let you see all the major repairs that have been done over the life of the house.
Of course…what you really want to know is what will need to be done…again, I paid an “inspector” hundreds of dollars in the mortgage process and he didn’t identify what turned out to be the key and most expensive repair possible…repeated flooding due to a nearly collapsed drain!
I mean, how can you win, if the whole system fails?

I don't understand "nearby" and "flooding". Was it on your property or not? If someone else's drain failure is flooding your property then you need to get the city onto it, that's what you pay taxes for. If it is on your property then digging a new drain simply can't be all that expensive. What is "flooding" anyway? Is water actually coming into the house or just making the property wet? If into the house then it would have to be on the disclosure, plus be very obvious on inspection. If it wasn't on disclosure and the house is getting water inside then sue for the cost of repairs due to fraud on the disclosure.

If it was on your property was the drain fallen in? If not I don't see exactly how on visual inspection anyone could tell it wasn't draining. If it was fallen in how did you and the "inspector" miss it (you did go on the inspection didn't you)? I would file a complaint with the state licensing agency if this were the case.

Tenouncetrout says

The worst you can do, is buy a house that has been “Completely ‘UPDATED’”, that will most likely mean that old quality and in most cases still functioning and replaced with cheap materials, and many cases this also means. Walls were removed to create an “Open” space, weakening the structure by removing load barring walls. Chinese drywall, IKEA pressed board cabinet kits, with a marble counter top. Sure the stuffs flashy and new and flashy but does nothing to the value or quality of a house like updating structural components, like roof, foundations, additions, Plumbing, electric ect.

TechGromit says

You want the prick home inspector that going to find every little thing that’s wrong with the house.

Exactly. You want an inspector to talk you out of it, if he can. Let you know fully what you are getting into. And even then, he'll miss something.

Yep take a look around. Anyway. The government appears to be shutting down. Well as I watch this tragedy take place :( My dog spinnerfoot. Has gone into deep depression. He won't sniff other dogs. Spinner loves old people and does not want them eating his dog food. Yep he's got that look on his face.

This means bad things for the people we so love to help. Yep. Looks like with rising unemployment. The man - has been screwed to the front end of an old garbage truck. Yep. Pretty soon they will be living in tents. Near ole city hall. Spinner says don't cry. He's rolling on the floor hes laughing so hard. Never trust a two face dog.

They've had a hard time collection for the enviroment. Some guy came by the house. He looked like pigpen caught in a sandstorm. So I put a quarter in the plate. Times are tough.

I had a home warranty on an old house I bought, paid for by the seller. I didn't think it was worth anything when we closed, but I ended up using it three times: for the sewer line (twice) and to replace the hot water heater. It was easy and worked the way they said it would. This was probably 20 years ago; when I buy a house next, I'm going to look into getting get one.

John Bailo says

I was thinking about was something like CarFax.

that is why there is a CarFax... here is your chance to create a new internet business!

Heck, you might even call it HouseFax, HomeFax, or ResidentialFax..

Anyway, typical home inspection is predefined, will not check for everthing.
Your better off hiring/contracting your own inspector with specific criteria.

thomas.wong1986 says

Heck, you might even call it HouseFax, HomeFax, or ResidentialFax..

Not every repair is reported to Carfax, and if there were a housefax I doubt every repair would be reported either. If you search carfax, you'll find many instances where cars weren't reported.

this is why I like fixer uppers. Just assume the worst and make your offer accordingly.

I've only bought used homes, and they were sold "as is." Had a warranty, which I used.

You never know what you're getting. A guy in the neighborhood built a house on land that hadn't every flooded. Then another guy built a house across the street and built up the lot a bit, which changed the way that water moves thru the neighborhood. The first guy's basement flooded to the ceiling x2, then he dug a diversion trench. Now his other neighbors can't get into his house when it's raining.

Ain't no guarantees, you do the best you can.

I have always believed that since it's "illegal" not to disclose problems with radon, lead paint, etc. that there should be a public database listing all homes that have failed these inspections. If a radon company detects radon over the legal limit, they should be required to publish that information. Then it would be up to the sellers to either provide documentation that the problem has been mitigated or to price accordingly.

It's astonishing to me that 20 prospects can test the house and see that the radon is too high, while the seller waits for the 21st to be a greater fool, not test for radon and set up a rec room for the kids in the radon polluted basement.

In theory, unrealtors are legally required to disclose if the home has failed a radon test, but I personally know of more than one property where they get around this requirement by simply not reading the report. Then they can legally claim they "don't know" of any radon problem.

Nice.

dear dumb guys

read the law

(5) It is not disputed that current law requires a broker to disclose to a buyer material defects known to the broker but unknown to and unobservable by the buyer. (Cooper v. Jevne (1976) 56 Cal. App.3d 860, 866 [128 Cal. Rptr. 724]; Lingsch v. Savage (1963) 213 Cal. App.2d 729, 733 [29 Cal. Rptr. 201, 8 A.L.R.3d 537]; see also regulations of the Department of Real Estate set forth in Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 10, § 2785, subd. (a)(3).) The Cooper case contains the most complete judicial articulation of the rule: "It is the law of this state that where a real estate broker or agent, representing the seller, knows facts materially affecting the value or the desirability of property offered for sale and these facts are known or accessible only to him and his principal, and the broker or agent also knows that these facts are not known to or within the reach of the diligent attention and observation of the buyer, the broker or agent is under a duty to disclose these facts to the buyer. (Lingsch v. Savage [1963] 213 Cal. App.2d ...)." (56 Cal. App.3d at p. 866.) If a broker fails to disclose material facts that are known to him he is liable for the intentional tort of "fraudulent concealment" or "negative fraud." (Warner Const. Corp. v. City of Los Angeles (1970) 2 Cal.3d 285, 293-294 [85 Cal. Rptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996]; Cooper v. Jevne, supra, 56 Cal. App.3d at p. 866; Lingsch v. Savage, supra, 213 Cal. App.2d at p. 735-736.)

here are some links for you to actually learn the law, rather than babble all this uninformed crap on the forum

Easton v. Strassburger http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1957009787875624247&hl=en&as_sdt=2,5&as_vis=1

Lingsch v. Savage http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13029365204223053784&hl=en&as_sdt=2,5&as_vis=1

there are plenty of live links to similar cases in these two. The relevant statute is Civil Code 1106 et seq, you can go to the law library (for free!! if not too busy at your coder jobs!! and research many cases under this section in annotated case law books, Witkin, etc. Make sure you check the pocket parts and Shepardize!!!!)

No, I am not going to respond to comments on this comment, or even read them. A lot of commentards on this site actually need to go to law school or get basic degrees in sociology or epistemology or history so we could move the discussions up to an intelligent level. The level of discourse here is a perfect example of why all the ills that this site complains about exist: an uninformed, stupid, and cowardly population cannot resist domination by a corrupt ruling class or act effectually to redeem their governance. Of course, this is basically true of most any site that takes comments by Americans.

Either get educated, act forcefully and intelligently, or become/remain slaves

For what it's worth, the laws about disclosure vary from state to state, and possibly even within states.

In some states, the seller is allowed to make no statement, to refuse to answer direct questions, and even to lie.

Have you ever seen a lead disclosure form where the seller claimed anything other than "no knowledge"? How often do you believe that's true?

I think the NAR has a national policy that requires all Realtors(tm) to disclose any material fact that they know. But (being Realtors), they often get around it by _not_asking_ the seller.

Caveat emptor ad maximus. There's no substitute for a home inspection, but don't trust them either. Inspectors are inherently limited by what they can see, they're not qualified for all evaluations, they make mistakes, they have friends to appease, etc.

Educate yourself, ask the seller about everything, review the disclosures, call in real experts, get a warranty if possible, and hope for the best.

quesera says

In some states, the seller is allowed to make no statement, to refuse to answer direct questions, and even to lie.

Please quote the state statutes that allow the seller to lie.

quesera says

Have you ever seen a lead disclosure form where the seller claimed anything other than “no knowledge”? How often do you believe that’s true?

I believer it's almost always true. I've owned houses that I am 99% sure had lead based paint. Did I rush out and get a lead test? Not a chance. Did I take appropriate precautions to avoid problems. Yep. Do I know anyone that has ever had a house tested for lead based paint? Nope.

hatefulhideoussnob says

read the law

There is law, and than there is reality. Original Poster is simply asking how to deal with the risks of reality. Real estate industry isn't the most "honest" of the industries.

hatefulhideoussnob says

dear dumb guys

Well, we all know you're not talking to us.

hatefulhideoussnob says

A lot of commentards on this site actually need to go to law school or get basic degrees in sociology or epistemology or history so we could move the discussions up to an intelligent level.

...and, based on the comment above, you're certainly not talking to me.

hatefulhideoussnob says

The level of discourse here is a perfect example of why all the ills that this site complains about exist: an uninformed, stupid, and cowardly population cannot resist domination by a corrupt ruling class or act effectually to redeem their governance. Of course, this is basically true of most any site that takes comments by Americans.

Believe it or not, there's actually land mass east of California. There are people and laws and everything, but they're located in America so maybe you didn't know they exist. I do wonder why, if you loathe sites where Americans can post, you lowered your standards to comment on this particular site. I mean, 'cause you're so much smarter than we are, and stuff...

ChrisLA says

There is law, and than there is reality. Original Poster is simply asking how to deal with the risks of reality. Real estate industry isn’t the most “honest” of the industries.

hatefulinsipidsnob, not everyone uses unrealtors - possibly because it's a dying profession that has proven to be little more than a short course and test. Many people became unrealtors during the bubble because they could make tons of money, just like the other real estate related professions (such as the mortgage biz). All an unrealtor needs to do is claim that they don't know about the defects and they're not passed along to the buyer.

But then again, you're not reading this because we're all beneath you. :)

It is a good question by OP. When I bought my home, 20+ years ago, there were no property disclosures, no inspections, and all agents represented the seller. I was unaware of the defects in my home. I got lucky I guess, that there was nothing that needed immediate attention.

Today, as an owner I would be required to fill out a property condition form when I list my home to sell. However, all the questions begin “I am aware...” If there is a defect, but I am not aware of it, I answer No. If I did not occupy the property, then I can claim I am not aware. If I am aware of a defect and do not disclose, I am subject to lawsuit from buyer. To my knowledge, that is the only penalty. I don't think I can be arrested or fined for lying on a disclosure form. Threat of lawsuit is a big deal to me, but maybe not to everybody.

If I am an investor who purchased a home in an LLC, and cosmetically fixed the home without ever living in it, I'm pretty protected from a lawsuit. This alone is a good reason to not buy a home from a flipper.

A good inspector can catch some stuff, but he can't catch everything. If the inspector has suspicions about a specific system, and recommends a specialist inspect that, it would be wise to pay the money for that additional inspection.

Every state's disclosure forms are different. Here, for a SFH, the disclosure relates to the home and land. It does not include fencing, sheds, driveways; maybe because those are things a buyer can see. I think it asks if the property is in a flood plain. It asks if there was any remodeling done without a permit. Obviously it asks about roof, electrical, plumbing, sewer or well problems, lot line disputes, termites. It asks about (known) upcoming tax increases or special assessments, or HOA rule changes. It seems pretty comprehensive but I don't know what's missing.

There are states that ask seller to disclose things about the area, like traffic, crime or noise. Some things are subjective. If there was a bank robbery two miles away or a shoplifting ring working the local mall does that qualify as crime to be disclosed? If my car was vandalized last year, but that's the only problem in 20 years, does disclosing that sends an unrealistic message. Does seller have a duty to read the local newspaper to know the crime pattern? My neighbor has motorcycles. The occasional engine noise does not bother me. It bothers another neighbor. Is that a noise issue that should be disclosed? If you are a buyer, would you want me to disclose that the fire department activates sirens when they use the nearby boulevard as a route to emergencies?

In NY, the owner has a choice to fill out the disclosure or pay buyer $500. That's pretty nuts IMHO.

An anecdote, when my brother purchased his home, the seller did not disclose a problem with the sewer lines. Within a couple of days of water use from 5 people, the drains backed up into the basement. Seller claimed that because he lived in the home alone, he could not have known that the pipes could not handle higher usage. The local plumber that brother hired just happened to be the same plumber that the seller had hired on several occasions to clear drainage lines. Oops. Seller paid for $5000 of sewer work and cleaning basement floors, walls and ductwork to prevent mold.

There is always risk in buying a house. If you are not knowledgable about houses and how to inspect them, hire a pro who has a lot of experience in house repair/construction. Do NOT use the inspector the realtor recommends. Find your own. Especially be concerned about the foundation of the house and how it is sited. Try to find a house that is higher than surrounding houses.

Also, buy a one year home warranty.

Seller representations about house condition are usually not to be trusted since they want to sell the house. Trying to prove in court that the seller had actual knowledge of the defect is usually difficult.

elliemae says

Believe it or not, there’s actually land mass east of California

Love this.

bayview6 says

There is always risk in buying a house.

Yup.

bayview6 says

Seller representations about house condition are usually not to be trusted

Agree.

In 1991 I completed Real Estate classes to get an associate's license in S. California. I Have since discovered what a racket the entire R.E. "industry" has become here and lost interest. One thing I do remember is that all contracts at the time had a "Latent Defect" clause that supposedly "protected" a buyer against invisible defects, and especially allowed for court redress if it could be proven that the seller covered up defects by painting over the problem or or otherwise concealed evidence of defects. Has that clause vanished from the "Offer to Purchase" paperwork?