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.
Hello everyone - I have a question to either realtors or real estate attorneys - A friend in Raleigh told me she just read an article about people getting sick in homes they purchased after foreclosure due to these houses being meth labs before they bought them. I didn't get all the details except there were reports of children getting bloody noses and sick. I am curious - is there not a law in NC that states that the seller must disclose things like that or a murder or death in the house when they sell it??
I know in CA you are supposed disclose such things, although I am sure there are some sellers that don't disclose them unless the buyer asks them.
What are the disclosure laws like back there. I would like to know since I will be buying a house when we get back there later this year or early next year. HELP.
Meth labs are required by law to be disclosed. Although...a meth lab is illegal. Do we expect a person who runs a meth lab to disclose it???
I have heard that if a place was used as a meth lab, there is residue left on the walls. I would expect that a Home Inspector would have noticed something unusual.
Sellers "disclose" material facts. I don't think a death is a material fact.
A home inspector may not see any signs or have had the proper training to realize a home had been a former meth lab. Especially, if the cleaning/decontamination was done thoroughly.
As far as the home owner and the NC Property Disclosure form, it is a joke. Unless the home owner is a real estate broker, they are not under any obligation to disclose anything. They can simply make "no representation" on the form and sign it, just to have it in the file.
Now when it comes to the broker having to disclose or not...here's a gray area in NC.
Due to potential lingering health consequences inherent in a property formerly used to manufacture methamphetamine, a broker must disclose the fact that the property was a meth lab if the broker knows or should have known, unless remediation has been completed and can be properly documented.Whether a broker “should have known” will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Personally, I don't see how a broker with any conscience could NOT disclose the home was a former meth lab, even if the remediation was completed and properly documented. Someone who does this should have their license yanked and worse...
wow, please excuse my ignorance, but are homes used for meth labs so often that there is actually a disclaimer just for this? And is this disclaimer just for NC? It would never even cross my mind that a house I was purchasing may have been a meth lab! I hope this is not a common issue
Last edited by lunadesign; 07-17-2009 at 08:15 PM..
Reason: spelling
wow, please excuse my ignorance, but are homes used for meth labs so often that there is actually a disclaimer just for this? And is this disclaimer just for NC? It would never even cross my mind that a house I was purchasing may have been a meth lab! I hope this is not a common issue
I don't think I have ever been in a meth house. It is reasonable to do the research if one has a concern about the property.
There is no requirement to disclose something they do not know or cannot reasonably know.
In a foreclosure, a bank typically makes no representation regarding property condition.
If the problem has been documented as remediated, there should be no current problematic condition to disclose. To raise the issue may well be a violation of fidicuiary duty to the client, and for that violation, it would be reasonable to censure the broker.
Since we are in a caveat emptor state, the Buyer shoulders the responsibility for due diligence and research.
There is no specific disclosure regarding meth labs, just the ability to disclose environmental issues, and producing meth can create that condition.
Murder in a property does not have to be disclosed. If the murder is unsolved, and the property is suspected to harbor evidence or be the actual crime scene, and the investigation is still active, then the Buyer should be made aware that the scene is part of an active investigation which could impact them, and their "quiet enjoyment."
Generally speaking, sellers have to disclose little about properties, as long as they do not lie.
This was discussed in 2008-2009 Mandatory Real Estate Update classes. The big issue is: should the listing agent or buyer agent "should have known".
I think this may give a more in-depth explanation of what to expect. Here is an excerpt and link:
What are a licensee’s responsibilities? It could well be that brokers acting as property managers or listing agents for absent owners or other licensees might be viewed as “persons in control of a residence or place of business” under the rules which require responsible parties to remediate, although the law does not specifically address this issue. Due to potential lingering health consequences inherent in a property formerly used to manufacture methamphetamine, a broker must disclose the fact that the property was a meth lab if the broker knows or should have known, unless remediation has been completed and can be properly documented.Whether a broker “should have known” will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Thanks for all the replies. I was just asking this since my friend back there in Raleigh had read something about this. I think it was just about foreclosed homes and not informing the buyer of the house's history. I know the realtors involved with those sales probably know nothing about a problem with an existing sale. And the banks might know but not care. I wonder about the history of a house I might buy. Was there a meth lab, pot growing, deaths in the house either by natural causes or killing. The house that we have been renting here in CA for the last 12 years has a history that we were able to find out a little by going online. But just within the last year, we found out the house that was originally on this property burned to the ground, no one was injured or killed, but the burned house was left on the property as an eye sore and danger for the neighborhood for 2 -3 years. then a doctor and his son bought the property, demolished the old house and moved this house on to the property about 25 - 30 years ago.
I will definitely do my home work online before buying a particular home.
Thanks for the replies. Can't wait to get back there later this year, FINALLY!
wow, please excuse my ignorance, but are homes used for meth labs so often that there is actually a disclaimer just for this? And is this disclaimer just for NC? It would never even cross my mind that a house I was purchasing may have been a meth lab! I hope this is not a common issue
It's probably not a common issue here, but yes in some areas it's such a common problem that it needs to be disclosed. At the height of the market in Portland, there were a lot of previously crime ridden areas that were being rehabed & homes flipped by those looking for a quick buck. And yes a home can be rehabed such that a professional inspector would not know that it was previously a meth lab. But like others stated those chemicals get into walls.
In Oregon the disclosures alone were about 4 or 5 pages long. Disclosures in NC are a joke. Compared to other states the standard NC real estate contract, imho, protects the seller much better than it does the buyer. Developers have a lot of pull here that I did not see in Oregon and this influence affects real estate laws.
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.