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.
30 K to paint a house interior LOL, suckers born every day.
Touching up where a photo was hung is small stuff and you are talking about suing.
They would be better off if you walked away and they got reasonable buyers in.
The disclosure form you posted says DAMAGE from water or moisture.
Maybe they moved the pipes to prevent damage.
I sold a house we remodeled extensively and I was told by my realtor we did not have to
mention every single renovation done.
Every used home, will have some type of past problems/damage that was repaired. The older the home, the more there will have been. They call this normal maintenance.
To handle where the pictures were hanging, is easily solved, and does not require a complete repaint. Today you can get paint that is a perfect match for the paint. A few minutes on each area, can solve the problem. No big deal.
I do not believe fixing a pipe because it froze, assuming it was done right away, is necessarily "moisture related damage" in the sense they are talking about in the disclosure. "Moisture related damage" implies a condition that went on long enough to cause some other damage... beyond just being wet. Either way.... it was fixed, arguably improved, and is an issue the owners may not have thought they needed to disclose. It is at least not certain with the facts we know, so I would not assume they intentionally withheld anything.
Agreed. If the pipe didn't burst and actually cause any damage, I can see how a seller might interpret that disclosure requirement as not applying to a frozen pipe with no actual water damage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtrader
To handle where the pictures were hanging, is easily solved, and does not require a complete repaint. Today you can get paint that is a perfect match for the paint. A few minutes on each area, can solve the problem. No big deal.
I agree. My painter does touch up for homes I list all day long and he does paint matches. He is such an experienced painter that he can create a color palette on site and paint the touch-ups from there. It is possible that the sellers know the paint color so you can match that way too.
The goal here is to be realistic. The plumbing is not a disclosure problem.
As for the nail hole botched repair, are you not planning to hang art in those places anyway?
The house always looks worse (and dirtier) when the furniture is out and the pictures are off the walls. I would not hold up the closing based on what you've reported, and I wouldn't trust them to "make it right" based on what they've already done.
Get multiple recommendations from people you trust for a painter who can fix it. Not the $30K guy. That's ridiculous. This is not something that has to be done before you move in. If you have to wait a while for a competent painter, I would.
I'm going to take the OP at their word and it sounds like to me this isn't just paint and you can't just paint over it? As far as the walls go I get the impression it was normal wear and tear that they should have just left alone, but didn't. They created something that now needs to be repaired? I see how that is a problem.
The shouldn't be considered a problem if all they did was move the shower head. If there was water damage that is another matter entirely.
In Idaho you do have disclose certain things. It wouldn't be realistic to expect a home owner to disclose every change they made, but like the OP we do have language about water damage and past mold issues. You have to disclose if there was a former meth lab there, even if there is remediation done. I can't think of other things off the top of my head, but what they have in common are possible health and safety issues.
I looked at the disclosure form. For essentially all line items, it asks the seller, "Are you aware of any past or present.... If yes, describe...." It does this for roof, electrical, HVAC, plumbing, etc etc etc. For example,
At the end of the day, the plumbing thing isn't really a concern, I guess, other than it is indicative of the sellers not being as forthright as I would imagine they would be required to be.
The bigger issue for me is the "patch and paint" issue. From my perspective, it is damage - and damage caused in the past week or so well after all contingencies have been released.
I wouldn't even really mention the pipe thing. It was fixed so isn't an issue to worry about going forward.
As for 30k to paint the place... should be half that on the high side (for 7,000 sq ft. you said 2800 too).
I do not believe fixing a pipe because it froze, assuming it was done right away, is necessarily "moisture related damage" in the sense they are talking about in the disclosure. "Moisture related damage" implies a condition that went on long enough to cause some other damage... beyond just being wet. Either way.... it was fixed, arguably improved, and is an issue the owners may not have thought they needed to disclose. It is at least not certain with the facts we know, so I would not assume they intentionally withheld anything.
...
The Utah form also requires:
Please describe, to your knowledge, any attempts to repair any moisture−related damage and/or to prevent any recurrence of water and moisture−related problemson the Property:I'm not trying to give advice but my layman's interpretation is that this was certainly an attempt to prevent a recurrence of water and moisture related problems.It also says 'problems', not just 'damage'. Freezing in pipes is a water related problem even if it didn't damage the pipe.
If it were me selling, I would disclose it based on that text.
I'm going to take the OP at their word and it sounds like to me this isn't just paint and you can't just paint over it? As far as the walls go I get the impression it was normal wear and tear that they should have just left alone, but didn't. They created something that now needs to be repaired? I see how that is a problem.
I understand what the OP is talking about because I had my client, the seller, do this once.
They were 75 years old and had tons of art and a TV mount on the walls. They "repaired" the holes terribly. It really did look horrendous. I sent my drywaller out to redo all of their repairs. It was about $750 in drywall repair work/retexture for a 1500 sq foot house as they are super fast. They were trying to be nice, but really made a mess of it.
I've watched my drywaller work and he and his crew have these round drywall sanders that they just cruise with over the walls. Those things are amazing. I'd botch it because I don't know how to use it, but they work fast. OP, it needs to be fixed but I don't think it will be as expensive as you think. Call some drywallers. Oh and OP, I live in a city with a contractor shortage too.
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.
Yup! Diana that was me! Quite amused at the comments on this one!
