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.
[quote=MrRational;27986565]What? She didn't have the foresight to ask this common and oh so basic question about the property? Is 'heinous or notorious crime" not on the standard disclosure sheet?[/quote]
Most states do not require such disclosures.
If a prospective buyer asks, the seller has to disclose.
Buyer to buyers agent:
"So, is there anything else about the place I haven't asked about that maybe I should know?"
Here's what you're still not understanding:
Person A's idea of what a buyer "maybe should know" about a property is different from Person B's.'
This is why disclosure statements deal with material defects, do not ask a seller to speculate about what went on in the house before the seller owned the home, and often ask only about a finite time limit (5 years, for instance).
I don't see how this can be any more clear. But whatever.
If its not a required disclosure in that state I don't believe she should have grounds to pursue this. In Texas it is a specifically asked question on the disclosure sheet so here you would have a case (assuming it could be proven that the seller was aware).
Seems kind of silly to me, but I'm not superstitious and if anything would consider a notorious history of the home just an interesting thing.
Is the crime attached to the property or the structure? There was an arson-murder-suicide in my townhouse development in Pennsylvania, and the structure was destroyed. It was later rebuilt, would that make a difference?
...structure was destroyed. It was later rebuilt, would that make a difference?
Excellent question, and one that shows the numerous complexities that exist with a situation like this. Let's say that someone living in a neighborhood claims to have seen Bigfoot. Are you the suppose to disclose that even if you have no proof, and have to suffer the damage of lower value as a result?
Now if Bigfoot broke into your property and damaged something then it would make sense to have to disclose the resultant damage.
The problem with an open ended disclosure ("tell us everything you know") is that there is an unlimited amount of things that different buyers might want disclosed to them. There'd be lawsuits all over the place based upon buyers and sellers having differing opinions as to what should be disclosed.
That's why many states have limited the disclosure to material defects. It's just common sense to limit the disclosure to those things that are present at the subject property that can be discovered by an inspection.
A Pennsylvania woman has appealed to the state Supreme Court in her suit against a home seller and real estate agent who failed to disclose that a murder-suicide had taken place in the home she purchased.
When Janet Milliken, 59, moved from California after her husband died, she had hoped to start a new life with her two teenage children in Pennsylvania near her family.
She bought a home in Thornton, Pa., for $610,000 in June 2007. She learned a few weeks after she moved in from a next-door neighbor that a murder-suicide had occurred the year before in her home.
She sued the seller and the real estate agent for fraud and misrepresentation, saying they made a "deliberate choice not to disclose the home's recent past," according to a court document.
The trial judge granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, saying state law does not require agents to disclose such events.
Then in December 2012, a panel of the state appeals court affirmed that decision, though with a nearly split decision.
The matter dates back to Feb. 11. 2006, when a previous homeowner, Konstantinos Koumboulis, allegedly shot and killed his wife, then shot himself in the master bedroom.
Joseph and Kathleen Jacono had bought the home Oct. 31, 2006, knowing of the murder-suicide, for $450,000. They later sold it to Milliken, who wants the transaction rescinded and her money back.
Filing a petition to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania last week with the hope of arguing the case further, the attorney for Milliken, Tim Rayne, said they "hope to have Pennsylvania recognize that having a horrific event occur within a property can be just as damaging and troubling to a future homeowner as a physical defect, or perhaps even more so."
"Having a gunshot murder-suicide committed within the home is much more devastating than having a small leak concealed by the previous homeowner," Rayne said. "Physical defects can be fixed. Troubling events that could and did occur in this home could never go away."
Rayne said sellers should be required to disclose troubling events "at least for some period of time."
Abraham Reich, the attorney for the Jaconos and their agent with Re/Max, said, "The majority, en banc [full-court] opinion of the Superior Court was well reasoned and consistent with years of industry practice in Pennsylvania.
"While the issue is interesting, the number of times it comes up does not warrant Supreme Court review," Reich said. "The Superior Court opinion provides guidance for any real estate transaction in the future and puts to rest the uncertainty of whether a seller has a duty to disclose a murder-suicide or any other type 'psychological damage.' In my opinion, the result is a good one."
Rayne said Milliken, 59, was "disturbed" when she learned of her home's history from a neighbor. "As she was struggling what and if to tell the kids," he said, her children's friends visited the home for Halloween and told the children about the murder-suicide.
"They were very upset upon learning about it and disturbed about the whole situation," Rayne said.
"They were dealing with the death of a father and husband and wanted to move closer to family, and then this happened to them," he said. "It was a tragedy all around."
Rayne said Milliken and her children are still living in the home. He said they would prefer to move out of the home but can't afford to do so without selling it.
"They feel that if they sold it, through good conscience they would have to disclose," Rayne said, "so it would negatively impact the value."
Both the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of New York have laws to protect purchasers from what is known as "stigmatized properties".
A stigmatized property is any home that has been the site of a murder, a suicide, or a house that is reputed to be haunted. There may be other situations where a home is stigmatized, but those are absolutely covered by these laws.
The reason is simple, homes where a tragedy has taken place are frequently not as interesting to buyers, and thus their marketability is not equal to a home where no tragic events are occurs.
The same is true of reputed haunted houses. While not all people believe in haunting, enough do that it conceivably could impede the sale of the home or encourage buyers to attempt to negotiate a lower
price.
Homes where there has been a death by natural causes are not stigmatized properties.
The real estate broker knew of this law and failed to disclose these events to the buyer.
It does not matter weather or not you would be turned off by such a property or not, the fact is that some people wouldand that fact decreases the marketability of the houde. The very fact that the children were told of this by neighborhood children proves that the house is indeed instigated. It has a bad reputation. And thus, it is less desirable than other homes.
The broker must have been thrilled when these people from California showed up with no knowledge of the home's history.
You raise an interesting point about a "haunting". Personally I don't believe in ghosts. So if I were asked the question I would say no 100% of the time. Now, it may be that others who do believe in such things think a particular house is haunted. Is that something the seller would have to disclose?
You raise an interesting point about a "haunting". Personally I don't believe in ghosts. So if I were asked the question I would say no 100% of the time. Now, it may be that others who do believe in such things think a particular house is haunted. Is that something the seller would have to disclose?
Exactly. Try asking a dozen people how they define "haunted"; you'll get a dozen different answers.
"Haunted" is too subjective to be required in a disclosure.
If its not a required disclosure in that state I don't believe she should have grounds to pursue this. In Texas it is a specifically asked question on the disclosure sheet so here you would have a case (assuming it could be proven that the seller was aware).
Here's the way the Texas Seller's Disclosure words the question:
(Is the Seller aware of) Any death on the property except for those caused by: natural causes, suicide, or accident unrelated to the property.
The key words are "unrelated to the property", meaning the property didn't cause the death due to a material flaw in the property itself.
Would I advise a seller to disclose to avoid the hassle of a lawsuit (anybody can sue for anything fool thing these days, and even if it's thrown out of court it can be an expensive hassle)? Yes, I would, for that reason.
Here's the way the Texas Seller's Disclosure words the question:
(Is the Seller aware of) Any death on the property except for those caused by: natural causes, suicide, or accident unrelated to the property.
The key words are "unrelated to the property", meaning the property didn't cause the death due to a material flaw in the property itself.
Would I advise a seller to disclose to avoid the hassle of a lawsuit (anybody can sue for anything fool thing these days, and even if it's thrown out of court it can be an expensive hassle)? Yes, I would, for that reason.
Seems odd they would exclude suicides.
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.
