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.
My seller is unaware of the infestation. Clearly if they knew it would have to be reported on the disclosure form. Must I tell them? The answer is no. I must tell them of any defect I know of...but there is no requirement that I tell them other things...particularly when it is contrary to their best interest to know. That is, by the way, a legal opinion in writing.
AZ treats it differently than NV - the "reasonable person" theory would kick in - "would a reasonable seller (or other person) want to know about a previous mold situaton - and the fact that it was remediated? In AZ, yes. And, there is a legal opinion, in writing, on that. Enviormental concerns, even those that are only possible or perceived, must be disclosed.
The AZ SPDS is quite extensive. If you would like Capt, PM me and I would be happy to get you a copy
I'm confused about the seller's disclosure form. Do you have to disclose current problems or problems that you've had in the past, but have now been corrected. For example, I'm selling my home and about three weeks ago, our sump pump stopped working and water backed up into the basement. The only damage it did was to the carpet in the finished portion of the basement. We immediately had the sump pump replaced and replaced the carpet and padding. Does this need to be disclosed on the disclosure form since the problem isn't ongoing and has been corrected?
On July 26, 2007, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled on NRS 113 in regards to seller disclosure.
the final jist is that in Nevada now there is support from the Supreme Court that a defect that has been repaired properly does NOT need to be disclosed.
The quick story is that the Seller had a material defect occur in her home and reported it to her homeowner’s insurance. The insurer accept the claim and the repairs were performed by a licensed contractor. Later, the Seller sold the home but did not report the material defect on the SRPD because it was repaired and no longer a defect. Within months of the sale, the Buyer learned, via a CLUE report, that a previous insurance claim had been made on the property. Ultimately, the Buyer filed suit against the Seller for ‘non-disclosure.’
The Nevada Supreme Court eventually got the case and ruled in July 2007. Opinion #26.
The Nevada Supreme Court declared that the issue was whether the Seller was required under NRS 113 (SRPD) to disclose the previous damage.
The Nevada Supreme Court declared, “Once the [damage] was repaired … it no longer constituted a condition that materially lessened the value or use of the [home. Accordingly, [the Seller] did not have a duty to disclose the …. damage.”
The Court continued that the Seller must “realize, perceive, or have knowledge of [the] defect or condition.”
The Court concluded, “a seller of residential property has a duty to disclose only those conditions that materially and adversely affect the value or use of the property, and of which the seller is aware, realized, perceived, or knew.
Because repaired damage does not constitute a defect under NRS 113 and [the Seller] did not know of the presence of [a defect], she did not violate the disclosure requirements contained in NRS 113… when she completed the SRPD.”
THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS PREVIOUS OR CURRENT MOLD,. WHICH YOU MUST DISCLOSE REGARDLESS OF REMEDIATION
Unless the seller is very honest, truthful and educated about property conditions and building codes the disclosure statement is almost worthless. Agents will not sign them because they do not want to be responsible for any errors or omissions.
Get a good independent inspector who will work for your interests, not the agents.
Unless the seller is very honest, truthful and educated about property conditions and building codes the disclosure statement is almost worthless. Agents will not sign them because they do not want to be responsible for any errors or omissions.
Get a good independent inspector who will work for your interests, not the agents.
Generally speaking (at least in AZ) Agents NEVER sign the property disclosure statements. That would be legal insanity
As for the honesty of the seller comment; if the seller is aware of a condition that should be disclosed but, they were dishonest and did not, they have put themselves (and their heirs) in potential legal jeapordy for potentially a long period of time (depending upon the issue)
So, I must disagree with you - Sellers disclosure forms are far from being "worthless"
In Ga we aren't even allowed to assist in filling it out
generally at the time of listing we leave it with them to fill out and then pick it up signed and dated up to 5 days later
In Ga we aren't even allowed to assist in filling it out
generally at the time of listing we leave it with them to fill out and then pick it up signed and dated up to 5 days later
Not allowed by whom? I don't think there is any such rule. The RE industry simply does not want to get near the disclosure form. They particularly do not want the RE agent suggesting the right answer to the seller.
Discuss it with your agent. They should be familiar with the requirements of your state. If in doubt, it's usually better legal protection to go ahead and disclose.
You know, I've always been told that I'm 'not allowed' to assist in filling out the form. As a matter of fact, it was a point they made in the classes when I originally went for my license. Because you asked the question, it forced me to pull one out and read it. And you are correct. No where does it say that it needs to be filled out with out assistance. Another thing learned today and it's only 9am!
You know, I've always been told that I'm 'not allowed' to assist in filling out the form.
Risk Management 101:
Never, NEVER, fill out the Property Disclosure form for your seller! I recently testified as an expert witness in a case where the listing agent, charged with misrepresentation, did exactly this. Thought he was "helping" the seller - all he did was took full responsibility for the disclosures.
If a seller asks questions about questions / issues on the form, certainly you can explain the issue / requirement or, as appropriate, refer them to their legal counsel.
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.
