Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Back up guys, this isn't "electrical work" without a permit, it's drywall work without a permit, and very few localities prohibit drywall work without a permit. Covering an outlet with drywall is common enough that builders routinely mark the locations of outlets & switches on the (unfinished) floor. This isn't a big deal, nor is it a safety issue.
Putting a layer of drywall over damaged drywall is a common & workmanlike repair. Many people do it to increase the fire rating of walls & to reduce interior noise.
Can you prove that?
Maybe the previous owner contracted with an electrical company to install the outlets behind the existing drywall
Good Evening,
I apologize for not getting back to you sooner . . . and I truly appreciate everyone's time. We did have the property inspected but in hindsight, it was not done well. The inspector missed and/or the "contractor/owner" covered up:
• termite damage (obvious that the contractor covered this up as there was "brand new" MDF fixing a hole)
• open wiring in the attic: no junction boxes in three different spots (Covered by insulation)
• the foundation was in disrepair ($5,000)
• the crawlspace had "fake" venting (vents on outside with no actual hole in crawlspace)
• water heater was not to code
• leak in a bathtub drain
• a window with no siding (sill) at the bottom which lets rain run in between the vinyl siding and the old siding (sorry I don't know the correct terminology)
• the list could go on . . . and on . . . and on
MrRational: The outlet that was covered has another 18 inches away . . . which just doesn't make any sense to me?
No proof, but the previous owner supposedly gutted the property. We were told when shown the property. When we bought the place there wasn't a crack in drywall anywhere which made me believe it was true.
Is having a covered outlet a safety issue? I'm just guessing it is a safety issue since I understand it does violate code?
I understand that the drywall is not a safety issue, and I would have hard time proving anything. Please also note my former post was written in a fit of frustration . . .
Frustration mostly because the only reason I discovered any of these "inconveniences" was serendipitous. The termite damage because of leaking siding . . . the covered outlet because of a ruptured wall due to the foundation being lifted . . . the fake vents due to the crawl space being wet which caused the foundation issues . . . the open wiring because I went in the attic to see if there were any other possible places where the contractor/owner put other new outlets.
Thank you again for your time! I hope you all had a great weekend!
We did have the property inspected but in hindsight, it was not done well.
The inspector missed and/or the "contractor/owner" covered up...
Do you know a good lawyer? Get one. Today.
Someone very familiar with RE matters in YOUR county.
I suspect he'll advise you to do no more work to the home than is absolutely
required to make it habitable enough to tough it out in for a few months...
long enough to sort through the paper and processes of getting some sort
of equitable remedy to the situation.
I'd suggest focusing on a refund of all payments made to date and enough
generally to purchase a similar size/location home in decent condition.
I would imagine the sellers disclosure would come into play. Throwing the Home inspector under the bus is fruitless after 2 yrs unless there was some collusion going on. Often times small repairs that get neglected (see your home inspection report) turn into major issues. Most older homes have serious flaws once the walls are removed. Come to think of it, once the drywall/plaster are removed, newer homes are also included. lol
Good Evening,
I apologize for not getting back to you sooner . . . and I truly appreciate everyone's time. We did have the property inspected but in hindsight, it was not done well. The inspector missed and/or the "contractor/owner" covered up:
• termite damage (obvious that the contractor covered this up as there was "brand new" MDF fixing a hole)
• open wiring in the attic: no junction boxes in three different spots (Covered by insulation)
• the foundation was in disrepair ($5,000)
• the crawlspace had "fake" venting (vents on outside with no actual hole in crawlspace)
• water heater was not to code
• leak in a bathtub drain
• a window with no siding (sill) at the bottom which lets rain run in between the vinyl siding and the old siding (sorry I don't know the correct terminology)
• the list could go on . . . and on . . . and on
MrRational: The outlet that was covered has another 18 inches away . . . which just doesn't make any sense to me?
No proof, but the previous owner supposedly gutted the property. We were told when shown the property. When we bought the place there wasn't a crack in drywall anywhere which made me believe it was true.
Is having a covered outlet a safety issue? I'm just guessing it is a safety issue since I understand it does violate code?
I understand that the drywall is not a safety issue, and I would have hard time proving anything. Please also note my former post was written in a fit of frustration . . .
Frustration mostly because the only reason I discovered any of these "inconveniences" was serendipitous. The termite damage because of leaking siding . . . the covered outlet because of a ruptured wall due to the foundation being lifted . . . the fake vents due to the crawl space being wet which caused the foundation issues . . . the open wiring because I went in the attic to see if there were any other possible places where the contractor/owner put other new outlets.
Thank you again for your time! I hope you all had a great weekend!
Steve
If you bought the house from an ordinary home owner, and not some flipper:
• termite damage (obvious that the contractor covered this up as there was "brand new" MDF fixing a hole)
If they were the ones who had the termites treated and didn't disclose it, you have a legitimate cause. If they knew it was old termite damage that the last owner disclosed to them, you might have an argument. But, if that termite damage was old and they just thought it was a hole, then no.
• open wiring in the attic: no junction boxes in three different spots (Covered by insulation)
They lived with it and may not have thought there was a problem with it or thought it was taken care of properly. Your home inspector may or may not have an obligation to make it right, depending on your state.
• the foundation was in disrepair ($5,000)
They lived with it and may not have thought there was a problem with it. Your home inspector may or may not have an obligation to make it right, depending on your state.
• the crawlspace had "fake" venting (vents on outside with no actual hole in crawlspace)
If the vents are new you probably can argue about that one, especially if they did it right before the house went on sale or in response to a code violation. But, if the original builder did that it goes back to: they lived with it and may not have thought there was a problem with it. Your home inspector may or may not have an obligation to make it right, depending on your state.
• water heater was not to code
It is highly doubtful with they had any idea it wasn't up to code. Your home inspector may or may not have an obligation to make it right, depending on your state.
• leak in a bathtub drain
Unless you can prove they knew it or that it didn't occur in the last two years, go ahead give up that ghost.
• a window with no siding (sill) at the bottom which lets rain run in between the vinyl siding and the old siding (sorry I don't know the correct terminology)
If the very first rain after you lived in the house resulted in noticeable water between the two sidings and they didn't disclose it, go after them. But my guess is it took you a year or so to figure it out, they may have never realized it. But... How did you or the home inspector not realize a window was without a sill?
• the list could go on . . . and on . . . and on
While the person may have gutted the property, they may have been clueless that things were done improperly and were at the mercy of the professionals they hired, much as you are. However, if you bought the house from a flipper, who took short cuts and purposefully covered up flaws, that's a different story altogether. The issue may be the time that has passed. You would have to be able to prove the problem occurred prior to your ownership and, depending on your state, you may have passed the statute of limitations.
I would be very leery of buying a home from a flipper, despite the fact that we have flipped a home - or maybe because of it. We did everything right, which meant it cut into the profits, but for too many taking the cheap way out with a quick surface fix is just too tempting. Had we done that, in our case, we would have made an extra $8,000 but, as my husband put it, we like sleeping peacefully at night.
Good luck, and I'm sorry you find yourself in this situation. I'm sure it's frustrating.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Moderator - Diabetes and Kentucky (including Lexington & Louisville)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
