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.
I'm with Mike on this one. A large area of the wall painted a different color obviously stands out and will command the attention of the buyer during the final walk through. Painting the one wall I'm sure was a minor expense and even if the wall was then painted again by the buyer when they came to inspect your home they had the impression that it was a well maintained property.
Touching up little patches like the OP is talking about is a bit of a different situation. These are small defects and I would just check with the buyer and see what their preference is. This is what is morally right IMO. Your contract and your legal obligation may certainly diverge from this path.
Yeah.
Mike also meant to say, "Closer to closing," and the window to edit the wording expired.
My two cents.... I would NOT have necessarily painted at all... picture holes are normal wear and tear.
At this point I would have your agent ask their agent if they like the current paint or if they intend to redo it anyway, and see what they say first.... A the very least, do leave the paint.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 'wear and tear' in this context meant to address the point between the contract and closure? Meaning any 'new' wear and tear that the seller may cause during that period when she's still occupying it? Since the holes were (presumably) existing all through the buying cycle, wouldn't they just form the condition of the home as it's being presented on the market? In other words, even if it was beyond wear and tear, it would not fall foul of the contract if it was there all along, right?
You can interpret it that way if you want and your lawyer might defend that point of view, or you could defend it yourself in small claims. I don't know how a court might decide... And that's where stuff like this gets decided if someone wants to push it.
The new owner does not know if the damage existed at the time of contract or not, as it was hidden by pictures.
Picture holes, are a normal thing in a house that had pictures hanging in it. They are normal wear.
A two-foot hole in the wall, or in the floor, hidden by the couch, or by a large picture, is perhaps NOT considered "normal" wear.
Last edited by Diana Holbrook; 04-04-2018 at 09:20 AM..
A two-foot hole in the wall, or in the floor, hidden by the couch, or by a large picture, is perhaps NOT considered "normal" wear.
This is, btw, an issue that has come up with a client of ours.... upon moving in, a relatively badly done oil painting that had been in the house prior to close, was still there when they moved in. New owner walked over and picked it up off the wall, and discovered a two-foot hole in the wall. Internal wall, view was the bare studs and the back of the sheetrock in the next room.
Normal wear or hidden defect? Not sure.... the clients gave it only a chuckle and put the picture back. For all I know, it's still there.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 'wear and tear' in this context meant to address the point between the contract and closure? Meaning any 'new' wear and tear that the seller may cause during that period when she's still occupying it? Since the holes were (presumably) existing all through the buying cycle, wouldn't they just form the condition of the home as it's being presented on the market? In other words, even if it was beyond wear and tear, it would not fall foul of the contract if it was there all along, right?
What’s the point of restating the post you quote?
This is, btw, an issue that has come up with a client of ours.... upon moving in, a relatively badly done oil painting that had been in the house prior to close, was still there when they moved in. New owner walked over and picked it up off the wall, and discovered a two-foot hole in the wall. Internal wall, view was the bare studs and the back of the sheetrock in the next room.
Normal wear or hidden defect? Not sure.... the clients gave it only a chuckle and put the picture back. For all I know, it's still there.
Happened to us the day before we were to move out officially. Touched up a scratch hidden by the bed and the paint was now a different shade. We did paint the entire room. Didn't take very long with both of us wielding a brush. If you took pride in your home when you lived there, and we did, then we wanted to turn it over with the same pride as well. You know it is the right thing to do, why in heck do you have to ask your agent? I was a broker licensed in 3 states for over 30 years. I, when asked, always opted for the right thing to do. A good agent always does.
Happened to us the day before we were to move out officially. Touched up a scratch hidden by the bed and the paint was now a different shade. We did paint the entire room. Didn't take very long with both of us wielding a brush. If you took pride in your home when you lived there, and we did, then we wanted to turn it over with the same pride as well. You know it is the right thing to do, why in heck do you have to ask your agent? I was a broker licensed in 3 states for over 30 years. I, when asked, always opted for the right thing to do. A good agent always does.
Yup.
Some sellers go well above and beyond, out of pride or decency.
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.
