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.
And that's fine, but that is not something that a seller is required to disclose. So, if the buyer has an inspector, and that inspector identifies equipment that is approaching the end of its life, then the buyer will be aware of that fact. The point is that the seller is not required to disclose it.
I guess we have it easier. It says on the front page of our local property disclosure that the seller is required to disclose any material defects (summation and not exact wording of course).
I guess we have it easier. It says on the front page of our local property disclosure that the seller is required to disclose any material defects (summation and not exact wording of course).
That's the same trap that other agents on this thread are falling into. A statement on a property disclosure form isn't law. If there is a law behind it, that's different, but the disclosure form doesn't make it so.
But to your point, you can't really get any easier than Texas. The property code says if you use the form approved by the legislature, you have complied with the disclosure requirement. The confusion is caused by agents who have taken it upon themselves to expand the form to include information that is not required by law to be disclosed.
Anything WRONG with the house (and I know, you don't like that word, either) is to be disclosed. Which is to say, anything that doesn't work, anything that is flawed, not aesthetics. But I suspect you already knew that, right, given the topic under discussion?
And in the case of oak wilt, anything that MIGHT BECOME flawed with the property if there's any possibility that you knew that it was anywhere in the neighborhood, even if you didn't know. (There was a lawsuit on this one but I don't have the cite with me readily to hand, as I'm at my home office.)
If I had the time and inclination, I'd go do some legal research for cites (I used to actually be quite good at that, but, then, I was being paid to do it at the time), but tonight, I don't.
So I think it's established that you don't know what statute, code or case requires disclosure or exactly what that standard for disclosure is. Remember, we are a nation of laws, not a nation of disclosure forms. When in doubt, go to the source.
If I'm wrong and you do know, I'm sure you will let us know with a reference to the applicable law. But suffice it to say there is no general requirement to tell buyers that the property could become flawed in the future. Isn't that something that everyone knows anyway? At some point a buyer has to take the risk of loss and stop looking for someone to blame.
That's the same trap that other agents on this thread are falling into. A statement on a property disclosure form isn't law. If there is a law behind it, that's different, but the disclosure form doesn't make it so.
But to your point, you can't really get any easier than Texas. The property code says if you use the form approved by the legislature, you have complied with the disclosure requirement. The confusion is caused by agents who have taken it upon themselves to expand the form to include information that is not required by law to be disclosed.
Disclosure is a state law in SC. Unless it's new construction, estate, or REO it's required unless the buyer agrees to purchase w/o in writing and I've heard of that happening once. The local attorneys advise sellers if in doubt, go ahead and disclose it.
Disclosure is a state law in SC. Unless it's new construction, estate, or REO it's required unless the buyer agrees to purchase w/o in writing and I've heard of that happening once. The local attorneys advise sellers if in doubt, go ahead and disclose it.
Maybe it's my training as a lawyer, but I tend to want to look at the source - the SC law, in your case - when there is a question about what the law is. Relying on a form that was written by someone with who-knows-what allegiances or motivations is, frankly, lazy.
Case in point is the disclosure form in Texas that was created by the TX Assn of Realtors. It goes well beyond what is required by law to be disclosed. But agents don't generally tell seller's that. They just submit the form to be completed by the seller. Judging from the TX agents who are participting in this conversation, I wonder whether most agents know that they are asking their client to disclose more than is required by law.
Maybe it's my training as a lawyer, but I tend to want to look at the source - the SC law, in your case - when there is a question about what the law is. Relying on a form that was written by someone with who-knows-what allegiances or motivations is, frankly, lazy.
Case in point is the disclosure form in Texas that was created by the TX Assn of Realtors. It goes well beyond what is required by law to be disclosed. But agents don't generally tell seller's that. They just submit the form to be completed by the seller. Judging from the TX agents who are participting in this conversation, I wonder whether most agents know that they are asking their client to disclose more than is required by law.
My knowledge is SC based and I defer to the attorneys and the attorney's here advise disclose everything, even previous repairs that are completed.
I've generally gotten an inspection on anything I was selling so that an independent 3rd party was checking up on my inspection, and that I could REPAIR OR NOT based on MY SCHEDULE, instead of potential buyer's, which might end up costing me more for outside labor/expertise in doing the repairs!
IMO the TX rules (TAR) are a bit of a joke. Particularly because if you're going to sue a seller in TX after the fact there is NOTHING there for you to get.
When I sold my house in the San Francisco area the practice (although I'm assured this is not state-wide) was for the SELLER to get the inspection and have the REPAIRS DONE and CERTIFIED TO THE SELLER. There was no subsequent inspection done by the buyers, unless they noticed something that looked out of order to them. Odd.
Of course they didn't call "closing" what we normally refer to it as; the "passing of papers". They called closing when the documents were BACK FROM THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE. Again, odd local practice.
Case in point is the disclosure form in Texas that was created by the TX Assn of Realtors.
It goes well beyond what is required by law to be disclosed. But agents don't generally tell seller's that. They just submit the form to be completed by the seller.
Judging from the TX agents who are participting in this conversation, I wonder whether most agents know that they are asking their client to disclose more than is required by law.
Hi Austin...Sunny here... please explain what the seller is legallyrequired...to disclose to potential buyers...if they are currently disclosing too much on the TAR- Sellers Disclosure form. Are you meaning... the TAR form is useless and/or not legal?
I truely am interested...most agents don't have formal legal training & rely on what little we get from our MCE classes....thanks for your input...Sunny
Hi Austin...Sunny here... please explain what the seller is legallyrequired...to disclose to potential buyers...if they are currently disclosing too much on the TAR- Sellers Disclosure form. Are you meaning... the TAR form is useless and/or not legal?
I truely am interested...most agents don't have formal legal training & rely on what little we get from our MCE classes....thanks for your input...Sunny
If you look at the top of the TAR form, you will see a reference to the statute that requires disclosure. You will also see a statement that the TAR form goes above and beyond what is required by the statute. You can google the statute to see the text, but the short answer is that if you use the TREC form, you are doing exactly what the legislature intended, no more, no less.
My knowledge is SC based and I defer to the attorneys and the attorney's here advise disclose everything, even previous repairs that are completed.
If only more folks deferred to attorneys on legal issues...
The only question that I still have is who were those attorneys representing. If they were representing you, the broker, then that advice is intended to protect you, and is not necessarily in the seller's best interest.
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.
