Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-06-2008, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
10,971 posts, read 22,002,497 times
Reputation: 10695

Advertisements

Some interesting points here. SC requires a prop. disclosure on every property regardless of whether it is a FSBO or Realtor represented with the exceptions of estates and new construction.

To the OP, when questions like this or situations come up and you're not sure how to proceed ask your Broker in Charge up front. A few questions will help you learn and avoid uncomfortable moments as the transactions progress. Best of luck. If all your buyer lost was the $315 they should count themselves fortunate and move on.

PGH, you have some good questions there too. I didn't think about the rest like that, just answered the question at hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-06-2008, 10:06 PM
 
Location: Sacramento
60 posts, read 207,563 times
Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmyBergquist View Post
Just to clarify, in the state of Connecticut, the seller DOES NOT have to provide property disclosures. If no disclosures are provided, the seller must pay the buyer $300 at the time of closing. It does raise a lot of questions why the seller would not complete the property disclosure report, but this is legal and part of the purchase contract and listing agreement in CT.
Ah. Thanks for the info. Seems like a strange policy, but at least now we know it wasn't something shady.

Here in CA there are required disclosure statements... required as in required, and if an agent somehow completed a transaction without them, bad things would ensue (pun intended).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2008, 10:14 PM
 
Location: Sacramento
60 posts, read 207,563 times
Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001 View Post
I just sold 1 house, i been doing this for 2 months.. My client wanted to buy the house without disclosures and get a 300.00 back at closing. Next time I will tell him to get another agent if he wants to do something like that. Now I know.. Thank you.
Welcome to the business... I'm a relative noob myself. Won't be working full-time 'til after college.

You're absolutely right, some clients are not worth working with... especially if they have high-risk demands like forgoing disclosures.

Be sure you refer him to another agent just in case the transaction closes successfully.

For the record, that seems like a kinda messed-up law... essentially the Buyer pays the Seller $300 for the condition disclosures? That encourages Buyers not to receive disclosures, which in turn would lead, I assume, to lawsuits and to frustrated prospective Buyers like your client.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 03:24 AM
 
Location: West End-Hartford
625 posts, read 2,052,295 times
Reputation: 377
Sacramentan- in my experience, it is really uncommon for a seller to refuse to fill out a property disclosure. It's just a loophole available in CT. The only time I've actually seen no disclosures is in an estate, probate, or bank sale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 05:08 AM
 
Location: Orange County
200 posts, read 561,759 times
Reputation: 75
In the lower Hudson Valley of NYS over 90% of the attorneys advise their clients NOT to fill out the NYS Property Disclosure. Here it is clear that it is an attorney/legal question. Just north of my market area disclosures are provided as a matter of practice w/signed purchase agreements prior to attorney contracts
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 07:13 AM
 
15 posts, read 71,468 times
Reputation: 12
Default Inspection

The big problem was water in the garage not in basement, but in the garage area only, and in the garage the termite guy found one small area that could show termites were there at one time, but does not know if they are anywhere alse because other areas of the basement had paneling they inspector could not see behind.

Over all this house is under all the comps. I could not find anything lower price except for some homes in areas that my client is not interested in, and those homes were in the 210-220 range with issues that i advised my client could be to much to handle. They were bad.

side note: can water in the garage area of the basement be fixed with a mitigation system or radon seal along with a competent water seal contractor. The question is, are their some homes that no matter what you do, still be susceptible to taking in water?

I showed my client over 50 homes, some were 230-250 that had no serous problems, my client said he wanted to spend no more then 200K and that needed some work. I showed him homes in the 150-200 price but he did not like the location or it needed to much work, this house was in the middle. I really thought it was going to be the house, but my client scared by the inspection.

I am glad I used this inspector that other agents said would kill alot of my deals because he is like a marine. But I have to say, I feel good that I am not an agent that would get an inspector that would help me over my client.

I made it clear that without the property disclosures we have to assume they are trying to hide an issue. I went on to tell my client that because I cannot get any information, we would need to get it inspected and find out the truth.

He really liked the house before the inspection.

I can now use this story with other clients that consider buying a home without property disclosures. Its sad and I feel bad about this entire thing. If I tell my client that I will pay for lost inspection after the closing just to keep my client happy because that is all I care about. If I can help him out I will be happy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 07:45 AM
 
Location: Huntsville, AL
2,221 posts, read 2,928,225 times
Reputation: 488
Here in Alabama sellers disclosures are not required and are seldom used. (very seldom)

It is a buyer beware state, that is why you get a home inspection. To me it seems like the home inspection worked, and the buyer should not get the cost of it back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 09:10 AM
 
15 posts, read 71,468 times
Reputation: 12
Default Thank You

this from is better then most forums I have been in. Thnak You all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Montana
2,203 posts, read 9,327,077 times
Reputation: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001 View Post
The big problem was water in the garage not in basement, but in the garage area only, and in the garage the termite guy found one small area that could show termites were there at one time, but does not know if they are anywhere alse because other areas of the basement had paneling they inspector could not see behind.

Over all this house is under all the comps. I could not find anything lower price except for some homes in areas that my client is not interested in, and those homes were in the 210-220 range with issues that i advised my client could be to much to handle. They were bad.

side note: can water in the garage area of the basement be fixed with a mitigation system or radon seal along with a competent water seal contractor. The question is, are their some homes that no matter what you do, still be susceptible to taking in water?

I showed my client over 50 homes, some were 230-250 that had no serous problems, my client said he wanted to spend no more then 200K and that needed some work. I showed him homes in the 150-200 price but he did not like the location or it needed to much work, this house was in the middle. I really thought it was going to be the house, but my client scared by the inspection.

I am glad I used this inspector that other agents said would kill alot of my deals because he is like a marine. But I have to say, I feel good that I am not an agent that would get an inspector that would help me over my client.

I made it clear that without the property disclosures we have to assume they are trying to hide an issue. I went on to tell my client that because I cannot get any information, we would need to get it inspected and find out the truth.

He really liked the house before the inspection.

I can now use this story with other clients that consider buying a home without property disclosures. Its sad and I feel bad about this entire thing. If I tell my client that I will pay for lost inspection after the closing just to keep my client happy because that is all I care about. If I can help him out I will be happy.
It sounds to me like you did everything your client asked of you . . . and then some. He wanted (needed?) to stay under a certain price point but said he was willing to accept a "fixer", and that's exactly what you found him. And from what I can tell from your post it may have only needed some minor fixes (although the lack of disclosure and price might indicate otherwise).

A couple of things I see going on here:

1) I don't think you really have a serious buyer. 50 homes is a LOT of homes to show someone and not have them make an offer. And then when they finally do make an offer they cancel the contract.

2) Is this a qualified buyer? Have you spoken with his lender? What is the price range he is qualified for? It's fine if this buyer is choosing to stay below what he's qualified for, but I'm wondering if maybe he's working at the top end of his price range. If so, a "fixer" is the last thing he needs because he won't have the extra cash to fix it up. Also, depending on the issues with the home, the lender may decline to loan on some fixers.

I really don't like the way your state is doing their disclosures, allowing the seller to offer $300 at closing in lieu of disclosing is crazy. Definitely sets up a "buyer beware" scenario. I would say a really competent home inspector is worth his weight in gold in CT.

As you get more experienced in the business you'll start to be able to gauge the level of motivation of your clients. Unfortunately, not all of 'em are ready, willing, and able buyers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2008, 11:36 AM
 
15 posts, read 71,468 times
Reputation: 12
Default thanks

His pre qualify letter is for $225,000 be because of the high taxes in the area he does not want to pay more then 200,000.00 I am starting to think he is not serous. He lost out on 3 homes because he 1. did not bring a Strong offer, very weak offers. and 2. he wanted to wait and see if the price would drop down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top