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.
We're putting our 33 year old house on the market this summer. In order to facilitate a smooth transaction, I'll be having a pre-sale home inspection done soon. I'll fix any items to the core systems of the house that may be found.
If I make the inspection report available to buyers, would it then be advantageous to me to deny buyer inspection clauses?
Second question - which items have to be fixed? Obviously items like roof, structure, foundation, HVAC, plumbing and electrical have to be in good order. Are there lender requirements?
A couple things that come to mind. First, my house has radon in the (finished) basement. I believe it's 5.9 pCi/L. A test in the first floor had a reading of 3.7 pCi/L (below the recommended mitigation level of 4.0 pCi/L). I have no intention of addressing this. As far as I can tell, there are no radon requirements for lenders. I will be disclosing these reports to the buyer.
Another item that will likely appear on the inspection report are the condition of the windows, which are original to the house. They are in good working order, but they are old. Again, I'm not replacing windows.
I'm trying to identify items that "have to" be fixed, vs items the buyer may "want to" be fixed.
First, if you deny a buyer an inspection they most likely will walk. I would never buy a house without hiring someone to inspect systems, etc. and I think most buyers will think you are trying to hide something.
Buyers will probably ask you to mitigate the radon. Its up to you ultimately, but is it worth losing a sale over? I think its more attractive to go to market with it already mitigated.
The windows - I don't think they need to be replaced to sell. How do they look though? do they have storm windows? how is the glazing? how is the paint? If they have been maintained, leave them along. If not, it might be worth hiring someone to clean them up before you sell.
As far as lender requirements - not sure, but I think with FHA there are more rules around safety items and termites, insect issues. Others on here would know more.
Not allowing the buyers to inspect is a giant red flag that you're trying to cover something up. I have no reason to trust that the seller's inspection is really accurate.
First, if you deny a buyer an inspection they most likely will walk. I would never buy a house without hiring someone to inspect systems, etc. and I think most buyers will think you are trying to hide something.
No, on the contrary -- I'm trying to portray the condition of the house, defects and all, as accurately as properly. I'd like to control the sales process as tightly as possible. I'd rather have a contract where the buyer knows these facts up front and is willing to deal with them on their own, vs a contract with inspection clauses that seem to promote a second round of negotiations.
Question is - will buyers "trust" a seller provided inspection report?
Quote:
The windows - I don't think they need to be replaced to sell. How do they look though? do they have storm windows? how is the glazing? how is the paint? If they have been maintained, leave them along. If not, it might be worth hiring someone to clean them up before you sell.
They're single pane, true divided light 9 over 9 windows, with storms. They're in good (not great) condition. They're definitely a bit leaky, as are all windows of that era.
Agree with the above comments, I would strongly recommend that buyers get their own inspections. It's great that you are getting a pre-inspection and getting major issues addressed. That should make the buyer's inspection and review go smoother. But, there may be items you decided not to fix such as radon, or items your inspector missed that the buyer will want addressed.
Regarding lender requirements, that will vary from lender to lender. Lenders don't review the inspection reports, all they will see is what is documented in the appraisal report. FHA in particular will want any safety related issues the appraiser documents to be fixed.
No, on the contrary -- I'm trying to portray the condition of the house, defects and all, as accurately as properly. I'd like to control the sales process as tightly as possible. I'd rather have a contract where the buyer knows these facts up front and is willing to deal with them on their own, vs a contract with inspection clauses that seem to promote a second round of negotiations.
Question is - will buyers "trust" a seller provided inspection report?
If you want to do your own inspection and offer the results up to potential buyers I think that's great. You can disclose the issues that you're aware of and make it clear that you plan to do nothing about those items. That will definitely turn off a lot of buyers but it will weed out the ones that you'd actually be able to sell to.
However, I would still allow anyone making an offer the right/ability to do their own inspection. You may know that you're being transparent but your potential buyers don't know you and have no reason to trust that radon and old windows are the only real problems. Also, they're going to want to make sure that the problems you did mitigate were repaired properly.
No, on the contrary -- I'm trying to portray the condition of the house, defects and all, as accurately as properly. I'd like to control the sales process as tightly as possible. I'd rather have a contract where the buyer knows these facts up front and is willing to deal with them on their own, vs a contract with inspection clauses that seem to promote a second round of negotiations.
Question is - will buyers "trust" a seller provided inspection report?
They're single pane, true divided light 9 over 9 windows, with storms. They're in good (not great) condition. They're definitely a bit leaky, as are all windows of that era.
I would just leave them as they are - the windows. And no, i don't think a buyer will trust a sellers inspection report.
I would have an inspection to see what shows up - if you had three inspections, you would end up with at least three different reports/opinions. The advantage to you is that you know if anything major is going to cause you a problem after an offer is made (and the buyer gets his own inspection) There could be something that has to be done and time will no longer be on your side. That is to say, when you have to have something fixed in a hurry you should have your barrel cushion fluffed up and the lube warm..
And from my last experience - the buyer wanted to have the electrial panel replaced and we ended up giving $500 toward that end. It shows on the settlement documents.. Problem is the panel has not been replaced and most likely will not. If you make any concessions like this, I would (will) include "Panel to be replaced within 90 days of closing or I get the $500 back !!!!!
Question is - will buyers "trust" a seller provided inspection report?
Nope.
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.
