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.
They're telling you "no" because they want you to walk away. If the market is as hot as you say it is, they believe they'll find a buyer who won't be as observant as you.
That sounds perfectly plausible. But my question concerned what sellers are LEGALLY REQUIRED to disclose or make available for inspection re: the condition of the property.
Well, sellers are legally required to fill out a seller's disclosure. Of course, they can simply write "unknown" on all the questions that would be of concern.
Sellers are not legally required to provide access for inspection, unless they have signed a contract that binds them to do so. I expect we've all seen foreclosure listings where it is made clear that no inspection or even access to the property is made available - for example, bad unevictable tenants in an obvious teardown house, where all the buyer needs to see is that the property is properly described in the survey, as it's going to be scraped the day after closing anyway.
Basically, it's all in the contract. If you want access to all of a property for purposes of inspection, write it into the purchase contract.
That sounds perfectly plausible. But my question concerned what sellers are LEGALLY REQUIRED to disclose or make available for inspection re: the condition of the property.
Let's assume seller has agreed to allow inspections.
If he does NOT allow a particular inspection the buyer is entitled to cancel the contract.
I suppose it is possible that the buyer could sue (in civil court) to compel the buyer to follow through. Kind of like a suit for specific performance if the buyer refuses to close. Such a suit would be time-consuming, expensive, and uncertain of success.
It would not be "illegal" in the sense that the buyer could not call the sheriff and have the buyer put in the hoosegow.
No.... the way to go, is to move on to a place that you feel you can adequately inspect without obvious barriers.
The remedy in enforcing a contract is to go to court. Are you really going to want to take a seller to court to enforce an inspection on a house you don't yet own?
Do you really want to write a contract that makes a big deal out of demanding inspection access? You'd be painting yourself has someone who is difficult before there's even a deal.
Most homes don't have inexplicably inaccessible areas... Most home inspections don't require a court order to get in. It's usually not a problem, unless you want permission to tear in to walls, and you're not going to get permission to do that. You're just not.
I would write these two off and keep looking for something else that doesnt' send up so many red flags for you.
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.
