Misc Real Estate Legal Question - Page 2

KChiefs1 · 11-13-2014, 10:03 PM

My brother has had a situation come up & he asked for my advice & of course I thought of the Planet for possibles answers.

Here's the deal. He listed his 15 year old house for sale, listed with Remax & filled out the sellers disclosure on April 23rd. He got a very fast offer & they agreed on the price. The agent told him that the home inspector the buyers hired was a known deal killer in her words & to expect issues on the inspection. The inspection came back that the inspector stated there were settling issues & the basement floor was heaving.

He has never had any issues with water in the basement & the agent had a home inspector she knew check it out & he said it was minor settling & nothing major. Those buyers backed out & he relisted it again. The next buyers came & made an offer & they had a home inspection completed by a different inspector & he said there were minor settling issues in the basement & he put it on his report. They went ahead with the purchase.

My brother just got served as the buyers are sueing him for fraud as he never changed his disclosure statement. The buyers are also sueing the home inspector too. He doesn't think he did anything wrong as he never had water issues in the basement & he can't understand any of this. His agent never had him fill out another disclosure statement & he painted & put in new carpeting in the house.

What should he do & should he have anything to worry about? Anyone with real estate legal experience got any suggestions. The buyers want him to buy back the house which he can't afford since he just bought one. He is frazzled & can't understand how he did anything wrong.

Thanks for any help.

TambaBerry · 11-13-2014, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

I read the filed charges & they are sueing him for fraud. Inspector for negligence.

People are so shitty wow

nstygma · 11-13-2014, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

I read the filed charges & they are sueing him for fraud. Inspector for negligence.

If they're claiming fraud because he did not disclose settling, yet they accepted it after their own inspection discovered it, I don't see how they have a case. They made an informed decision.

stonedstooge · 11-13-2014, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

Actually they aren't. The front door sticks & there are minor cracks above the front door. They had the home inspector come out again & he told them all houses settle & to not worry. I guess they hired a foundation co & they sold them that they need $20,000 to fix it.

To be made whole, the most they could sue for would be $20,000. Not sure they would have a case for punitive damages against your brother. IF and that's a big IF they could prove fraud.

KChiefs1 · 11-13-2014, 10:33 PM

I don't believe there are any issues at the house other than that but they have overreacted by the sales pitch some foundation co laid on them & went out & hired an attorney who filed a lawsuit against him & the inspector.

Sounds like their attorney saw a couple of pigeons & went for it.

**Ming the Merciless** · 11-13-2014, 10:38 PM

I believe that the listing agent was bound to disclose the results of the initial inspection... (the negative one that said the floor was heaving)

I believe the buyer does have a cause of action, and the main question will be whose fault it was for not disclosing the 'heaving' basement report.

If , in fact, the basement is NOT. that heaving might be a defense....but I unfortunately think that the possibility of it heaving should have been disclosed....

We don't have basements where I live so this is not a super common issue...and also, I deal alot with commercial / multi family buildings...

The disclosures are MUCH more strict with residential...from my understanding ... the listing agent should have disclosed this ...again from my understanding..If I am reading your OP correctly. It may be the listing agent's fault.....or it may be the seller....but that original report probably should've been disclosed IMO.

But the case might be winnable for sure..especially if a independent person can verify the basement is not heaving....

But the shitty thing is that the seller will still have to spend the money to defend himself in this case, and then go after the dipshit basement heaving report inspector for a bad report to recover any damages...perhaps....

Sorry to hear about this...lawyers are shit. Their only interest is making cash off of others misery. I wonder if the seller can make a deal to give 5G to the buyer and be done with it?

That would be my advice...figure out what the defense would cost...even if you can win...and then point blank offer 50-60% of that in cash to avoid the lawsuit.

Forget principles.....its a cold business decision.

TL;DR have the seller cut a deal for 50% of the estimated total defense costs to try and avoid litigation...unless you are defended by insurance

**Ming the Merciless** · 11-13-2014, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nstygma

If they're claiming fraud because he did not disclose settling, yet they accepted it after their own inspection discovered it, I don't see how they have a case. They made an informed decision.

This is a good point, and I don't know the state law where the seller lives but the seller may have been bound to disclose the original report of the 'heaving'

I'm not 100% but residential disclosures are pretty strict and generally youre better off just disclosing everything you have...from what I understand.

**doomy3** · 11-13-2014, 10:55 PM

The seller's disclosure is to be updated all the way through closing. That rarely happens, but that is what is supposed to happen.

So in this case, if the first inspection uncovered structural issues, the seller's disclosure should have been updated to reflect that and should have been shared with the next buyer.

That original inspection report should also have been shared with the buyer.

If those things weren't done, then there is absolutely likely liability for the seller and seller's agent.

Regarding the second inspector being sued for negligence, I'll pretty much guarantee that the buyer signed some pretty extensive contracts saying that the inspector wasn't a structural engineer and that the results were just his opinion. Nearly 100% of the time, the report will recommend having a structural engineer write a report, removing most liability from that inspector.

KChiefs1 · 11-13-2014, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

This is a good point, and I don't know the state law where the seller lives but the seller may have been bound to disclose the original report of the 'heaving'

I'm not 100% but residential disclosures are pretty strict and generally youre better off just disclosing everything you have...from what I understand.

My brother isn't sure why the listing agent didn't have him fill out another disclosure but he believes the listing agent didn't take the first inspection seriously & didn't have him fill another disclosure out due to that. He had several people tell him nothing is wrong & he believed them. I'm not sure he even thought about it. He relied on his agent for everything.

verbaljitsu · 11-13-2014, 11:02 PM

I do this for a living, if the property is in MO, I would be happy to talk to them for free.

80% of what is in this thread is wrong. 816-224-9500. Ask for Nick.

**Ming the Merciless** · 11-13-2014, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by verbaljitsu

I do this for a living, if the property is in MO, I would be happy to talk to them for free.

80% of what is in this thread is wrong

Maybe you could post up some info so we can all learn something?

theres got to be a ton of interested folks, myself included

KChiefs1 · 11-13-2014, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomy3

The seller's disclosure is to be updated all the way through closing. That rarely happens, but that is what is supposed to happen.

So in this case, if the first inspection uncovered structural issues, the seller's disclosure should have been updated to reflect that and should have been shared with the next buyer.

That original inspection report should also have been shared with the buyer.

If those things weren't done, then there is absolutely likely liability for the seller and seller's agent.

Regarding the second inspector being sued for negligence, I'll pretty much guarantee that the buyer signed some pretty extensive contracts saying that the inspector wasn't a structural engineer and that the results were just his opinion. Nearly 100% of the time, the report will recommend having a structural engineer write a report, removing most liability from that inspector.

My brother didn't know he should have redone it. He is blindsided by this whole thing. The disclosure statement has his signature on it from the first listing & there wasn't a 2nd one completed.

**TribalElder** · 11-13-2014, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

My brother has had a situation come up & he asked for my advice & of course I thought of the Planet for possibles answers.

Here's the deal. He listed his 15 year old house for sale, listed with Remax & filled out the sellers disclosure on April 23rd. He got a very fast offer & they agreed on the price. The agent told him that the home inspector the buyers hired was a known deal killer in her words & to expect issues on the inspection. The inspection came back that the inspector stated there were settling issues & the basement floor was heaving.

He has never had any issues with water in the basement & the agent had a home inspector she knew check it out & he said it was minor settling & nothing major. Those buyers backed out & he relisted it again. The next buyers came & made an offer & they had a home inspection completed by a different inspector & he said there were minor settling issues in the basement & he put it on his report. They went ahead with the purchase.

My brother just got served as the buyers are sueing him for fraud as he never changed his disclosure statement. The buyers are also sueing the home inspector too. He doesn't think he did anything wrong as he never had water issues in the basement & he can't understand any of this. His agent never had him fill out another disclosure statement & he painted & put in new carpeting in the house.

What should he do & should he have anything to worry about? Anyone with real estate legal experience got any suggestions. The buyers want him to buy back the house which he can't afford since he just bought one. He is frazzled & can't understand how he did anything wrong.

Thanks for any help.

sounds like he will be paying for some foundation work at the very least. The fact he painted and put new carpeting in the house is irrelevant. If the buyers find out about the first deal that fell through and the fact it was ignored you might be bout to get raped.

Should have sold it with an As-Is disclaimer

KChiefs1 · 11-13-2014, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by verbaljitsu

I do this for a living, if the property is in MO, I would be happy to talk to them for free.

80% of what is in this thread is wrong. 816-224-9500. Ask for Nick.

I'll give him your number.

When is a good time for him to call you?

**TribalElder** · 11-13-2014, 11:07 PM

Also, people do some shitty stuff when selling a house. I had some scumbags switch out a dishwasher on me after the deal went through but I didn't have the proof. They replaced it with a older "working" model which I bet came out of the other house they moved into. People are scumbags and when it comes to real estate deals I'm putting the ****ing screws to people

**doomy3** · 11-13-2014, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by verbaljitsu

I do this for a living, if the property is in MO, I would be happy to talk to them for free.

80% of what is in this thread is wrong. 816-224-9500. Ask for Nick.

What do you mean you do this for a living? Are you a real estate attorney?

11-13-2014, 10:03 PM
KChiefs1 I’m a Mahomo! Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Mid-Missouri Casino cash: $6771021	Real Estate Legal Question My brother has had a situation come up & he asked for my advice & of course I thought of the Planet for possibles answers. Here's the deal. He listed his 15 year old house for sale, listed with Remax & filled out the sellers disclosure on April 23rd. He got a very fast offer & they agreed on the price. The agent told him that the home inspector the buyers hired was a known deal killer in her words & to expect issues on the inspection. The inspection came back that the inspector stated there were settling issues & the basement floor was heaving. He has never had any issues with water in the basement & the agent had a home inspector she knew check it out & he said it was minor settling & nothing major. Those buyers backed out & he relisted it again. The next buyers came & made an offer & they had a home inspection completed by a different inspector & he said there were minor settling issues in the basement & he put it on his report. They went ahead with the purchase. My brother just got served as the buyers are sueing him for fraud as he never changed his disclosure statement. The buyers are also sueing the home inspector too. He doesn't think he did anything wrong as he never had water issues in the basement & he can't understand any of this. His agent never had him fill out another disclosure statement & he painted & put in new carpeting in the house. What should he do & should he have anything to worry about? Anyone with real estate legal experience got any suggestions. The buyers want him to buy back the house which he can't afford since he just bought one. He is frazzled & can't understand how he did anything wrong. Thanks for any help.
Posts: 54,038

11-13-2014, 10:33 PM	#19
KChiefs1 I’m a Mahomo! Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Mid-Missouri Casino cash: $6771021	I don't believe there are any issues at the house other than that but they have overreacted by the sales pitch some foundation co laid on them & went out & hired an attorney who filed a lawsuit against him & the inspector. Sounds like their attorney saw a couple of pigeons & went for it. __________________
Posts: 54,038

11-13-2014, 10:38 PM	#20
Ming the Merciless Emporer of Mongo Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Milky Way Casino cash: $2967556	I believe that the listing agent was bound to disclose the results of the initial inspection... (the negative one that said the floor was heaving) I believe the buyer does have a cause of action, and the main question will be whose fault it was for not disclosing the 'heaving' basement report. If , in fact, the basement is NOT. that heaving might be a defense....but I unfortunately think that the possibility of it heaving should have been disclosed.... We don't have basements where I live so this is not a super common issue...and also, I deal alot with commercial / multi family buildings... The disclosures are MUCH more strict with residential...from my understanding ... the listing agent should have disclosed this ...again from my understanding..If I am reading your OP correctly. It may be the listing agent's fault.....or it may be the seller....but that original report probably should've been disclosed IMO. But the case might be winnable for sure..especially if a independent person can verify the basement is not heaving.... But the shitty thing is that the seller will still have to spend the money to defend himself in this case, and then go after the dipshit basement heaving report inspector for a bad report to recover any damages...perhaps.... Sorry to hear about this...lawyers are shit. Their only interest is making cash off of others misery. I wonder if the seller can make a deal to give 5G to the buyer and be done with it? That would be my advice...figure out what the defense would cost...even if you can win...and then point blank offer 50-60% of that in cash to avoid the lawsuit. Forget principles.....its a cold business decision. TL;DR have the seller cut a deal for 50% of the estimated total defense costs to try and avoid litigation...unless you are defended by insurance __________________ ---- 2018 Adopt-A-Chief : Chris Conley 2017 Adopt-A-Chief : FRANK ZOMBO Click here-->*The Holy Chiefsplanet Lexicon **
Posts: 44,482

11-13-2014, 10:55 PM	#22
doomy3 Supporter Join Date: Aug 2005 Casino cash: $5383539	The seller's disclosure is to be updated all the way through closing. That rarely happens, but that is what is supposed to happen. So in this case, if the first inspection uncovered structural issues, the seller's disclosure should have been updated to reflect that and should have been shared with the next buyer. That original inspection report should also have been shared with the buyer. If those things weren't done, then there is absolutely likely liability for the seller and seller's agent. Regarding the second inspector being sued for negligence, I'll pretty much guarantee that the buyer signed some pretty extensive contracts saying that the inspector wasn't a structural engineer and that the results were just his opinion. Nearly 100% of the time, the report will recommend having a structural engineer write a report, removing most liability from that inspector.
Posts: 12,854

11-13-2014, 11:02 PM	#24
verbaljitsu Starter Join Date: Dec 2009 Casino cash: $10013092	I do this for a living, if the property is in MO, I would be happy to talk to them for free. 80% of what is in this thread is wrong. 816-224-9500. Ask for Nick.
Posts: 440

11-13-2014, 11:07 PM	#29
TribalElder Arrowhead Trail of Tears Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: KansasCity Casino cash: $2430441	Also, people do some shitty stuff when selling a house. I had some scumbags switch out a dishwasher on me after the deal went through but I didn't have the proof. They replaced it with a older "working" model which I bet came out of the other house they moved into. People are scumbags and when it comes to real estate deals I'm putting the ****ing screws to people
Posts: 29,139