UST removed, soil not tested, safe to move forward with home purchase? (how much)

[TheresaGB]

We put offer on home in NJ, that is 170 years old. There was a 2,000 gallon UST that was "decommissioned" in 1999 prior to current homeowners taking house. The papers the sellers provided to us are the proposal, construction permit, what appears to be the inspectors sign-off on a piece of paper. Township supposedly cannot locate the closed permit.
The sellers removed this tank at our request a week ago and the sellers attorney provided us with the UCC Certification for the tank removal. We specifically asked them to remove it AND test the soil. They removed it, did not test the soil because they say the tank has now been "certified" on 2 occasions. The Township suggests that the UCC certification "certifies" that there was no leakage and that the town inspector would not have signed that unless he saw no evidence of leakage. Would that be sufficient for us to purchase this home re: the tank?
We have heard such conflicting information on this and are not sure what the risk would be if we move forward.

Any advise on how we should move on this is greatly appreciated!
Thank you for reading this!

Theresa

[bradykp]

hi theresa i just went through this in march. the document from the 90s - the city told me the same thing. problem was, what if the city changes it's mind in the future? i paid for a soil test. think it cost me $400. now, at least i have documentation.

if you asked for the soil test as part of the closing, then they owe that to you. did they agree to the terms? or was this just a verbal request? i'd make them do the test personally. how much are you spending on a house that shortcutting out of $400 is worth it?

that being said - it's probably fine. i'm just paranoid and wanted the piece-of-mind.

[joe moving]

so basically they dug up the ground... pulled the tank and filled it back in. I would imagine its going to be difficult to know exactly what part of the ground was right underneath the bottom of the tank to take a sample now?

i think you probably be ok but if you agreed on a soil test and they didn't do it then that is kind of shady.

[FrmlyBklyn]

Do the soil test! What qualifications does the town inspector have when it comes to testing groundsoil for oil contamination?

[TheresaGB]

Originally Posted by bradykp

hi theresa i just went through this in march. the document from the 90s - the city told me the same thing. problem was, what if the city changes it's mind in the future? i paid for a soil test. think it cost me $400. now, at least i have documentation.

if you asked for the soil test as part of the closing, then they owe that to you. did they agree to the terms? or was this just a verbal request? i'd make them do the test personally. how much are you spending on a house that shortcutting out of $400 is worth it?

that being said - it's probably fine. i'm just paranoid and wanted the piece-of-mind.

Thank you so much bradykp!
I find it interesting that neither of these towns could produce the UCC certification or a closed permit for the tank decommissioning. We have asked for the soil to be tested on 3 occasions in "written" letters to the attorneys. They are now saying the tank is "certified" on 2 occasions and they are not required to do soil testing. I think we should pay for the soil testing, if they agree to it. If they don't agree to it, we'll walk. That will be our "sign".

Thank you again!

[TheresaGB]

Originally Posted by FrmlyBklyn

Do the soil test! What qualifications does the town inspector have when it comes to testing groundsoil for oil contamination?

Thank you FrmlyBklyn! I agree. The town sugested, when I asked them to interpret the UCC certification for the tank removal, they said that the UCC cert. represents that the inspector inspected the tank and found no evidence of leakage, otherwise further action would have to be taken toward clean-up. My concern is that, if I sell this house and someone asks me where it says that there was no evidence of leakage, IT DOESN'T...Plus, I read on other posts that the town inspectors are specifically NOT certifying to that effect so they can't get sued later down the road.

[TheresaGB]

Originally Posted by joe moving

so basically they dug up the ground... pulled the tank and filled it back in. I would imagine its going to be difficult to know exactly what part of the ground was right underneath the bottom of the tank to take a sample now?

i think you probably be ok but if you agreed on a soil test and they didn't do it then that is kind of shady.

Thanks very much Joe Moving,
The company taking the sample, I believe, would ask for a site survey that would show the tank location. They have been avoiding doing the soil test. They suggest that it isn't necessary. I don't know that we will be completely comfortable with that!

[joe moving]

Good luck. IT seems like a lot of work to pull a tank and not take a soil sample.

We had our tank pulled for our own peace of mind and were sure to get soil sample so when we go to sell (whenever that may be) it should be open/closed case.