Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate > Real Estate Professionals
 [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 07-10-2013, 02:10 PM
 
Location: Inman Park (Atlanta, GA)
21,870 posts, read 15,094,512 times
Reputation: 14327

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bindenver View Post
In Colorado, we have no duty to investigate.
Neither do we in Georgia.

I agree - disclose, disclose, disclose.

There is a county in Georgia (a portion is unincorporated and a portion is incorporated). We have a plumbing disclosure that we "should" attach. It basically states that a home inspector or a licensed plumber needs to certify that the property has all low flow toilets and plumbing fixtures. If not, you can get your water turned on but you have 30 days to get your property in compliance. I have been amazed at how many co-Agents don't know to use that separate disclosure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-10-2013, 02:13 PM
 
1,835 posts, read 3,269,243 times
Reputation: 3789
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bindenver View Post
In Colorado, we have no duty to investigate.
Texas has no duty to investigate either. Under the hypothetical above I think the licensee would be fine.

EDIT - though there is no duty to investigate, the licensee can not also willfully turn a blind eye to something which would be obvious. If the agent knew that other houses had the same problem, and what the $20 charge was for, even if the Seller did not disclose, that Agent would still have to b/c they knew or should have known.

Last edited by marksmu; 07-10-2013 at 02:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
15,584 posts, read 40,460,388 times
Reputation: 17498
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bindenver View Post
How would you feel if the conversation went like this:

Licensee: Here is the property disclosure form - please fill this out with your current actual knowledge. If you don't know, you don't know.

Seller: I have to pay an extra $20 a month for the sewer, should I disclose that?

Licensee: Is there something wrong with the sewer?

Seller: No, not that I know of.

Licensee: If there is nothing wrong, you don't have to disclose.
See I disagree. I think the fact that they have to pay extra is disclosable and material. If someone is paying a higher rate than other people in their neighborhood and that increased rate would have gotten passed on to the buyer (assuming that the line didn't need to be replaced) it is completely material IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 04:23 PM
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,324 posts, read 77,177,570 times
Reputation: 45665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
See I disagree. I think the fact that they have to pay extra is disclosable and material. If someone is paying a higher rate than other people in their neighborhood and that increased rate would have gotten passed on to the buyer (assuming that the line didn't need to be replaced) it is completely material IMO.

Just what I'm thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 04:55 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
15,584 posts, read 40,460,388 times
Reputation: 17498
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post

Just what I'm thinking.
It seems like a special assessment to me. Those are a line item on our property disclosure statements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,324 posts, read 77,177,570 times
Reputation: 45665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
It seems like a special assessment to me. Those are a line item on our property disclosure statements.
Even if the service line replacement was not specifically required, the additional $20/month is disclosable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 05:15 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
15,584 posts, read 40,460,388 times
Reputation: 17498
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Even if the service line replacement was not specifically required, the additional $20/month is disclosable.
It would be here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Gorham, Maine
1,973 posts, read 5,227,722 times
Reputation: 1505
I'm late to this, but it is fascinating. In Maine, the seller could file a complaint with the Real Estate Commission and likely win, as Mark said earlier, if an agent knows or should have known about a material defect in the property it is his/her duty to advise the seller client to disclose it. The fact that the agent was told there was a $20 monthly charge should have set off alarms. Had it been me, I would have attached the original notice from the city to the Seller's Property Disclosure and let the buyers decide. Somebody else mentioned that the buyer agent wasn't completely in the clear about this and I agree. That agent, hopefully working in an area that they know well, should have known about the sewer issue, that is their job as buyer agent and should have done some investigation before closing. Since the job was paid for (by you), the buyer agent is now breathing easier as had you refused, the agents might have been forced to split the $3400 by the Real Estate Commission. I suspect in this case the commission would fine your agent and have them make restitution to you. I don't think the agent would lose their license, but they could be suspended for a short time and forced to take additional CEU classes.

I'm also wondering why this didn't come up prior to closing, in my state the utilities are notified one to two weeks prior to closing so final readings can be arranged and partial month water/sewer bills paid at closing (just as property taxes are). Does this not happen in your community? Wouldn't the water/sewer company advise the buyer that they could not take over the $20 payment?

Finally, I will ask you this. If an agent was competing for your business and told you that you should disclose the issue and another one told you to ignore it and net more for your house, which agent would you have chosen, if all other things were equal? Again I'm not defending the agent in this case, but I have lost listings where additions or decks were not properly permitted and I told the seller.

I agree with the others that said ultimately it was your responsibility to fix the defect in your home, however that agent did not act in your best interests and the various real estate commissions were established to protect you from such actions. I would check with your state's real estate commission to see what remedies you have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 05:49 PM
 
27,215 posts, read 46,778,320 times
Reputation: 15667
In our area unless the agent lives in that community, no agent will know and utilities can't be changed until the HUD is shown to set it up.

Any seller can say they discussed it but that is not always the truth and neither do agents always do the right thing which hurts our profession.

I tell our agents over and over, better safe than sorry and why would any agent risk their license for any seller and/or buyer!

If a seller doesn't disclose something which the agent is aware off than we can get away with it by listing it on the MLS so any other agent can read it and it will be incl. on every other website we upload the listing, that way the agent/brokerage is covered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2013, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Mokelumne Hill, CA & El Pescadero, BCS MX.
6,957 posts, read 22,320,866 times
Reputation: 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
It seems like a special assessment to me. Those are a line item on our property disclosure statements.
This was sort of my thinking as well as it would reflect a lien on the property in CA and possibly show up in a title report.

Just another reason I'm happy to have all those "nanny state" disclosure requirements here in CA.

Best of luck to the OP and a special appreciation to marksmu, whom I can't rep enough for his excellent post earlier in this thread.
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 > Real Estate Professionals
Similar Threads

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