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.
This caught my eye because I know people who had a problem with these. Yes, it should have been on your home inspection....AND not just sitting on the sheet but explained to you verbally or typed on the inspection report that sometimes there are these problems. Or that he found the pipes well installed or whatever.
There were a couple of windows in time when one could collect from...I think the arrangement was a fund or , at any rate, have them replaced because of all the suits. But that was quite some time ago.
Some people I know with this bursting and flooding problem now just collect on their insurance. Which, now that I think of it, could be an interesting issue on its own...insurance company and a property with PB piping.
I am getting ready to sell and PB "blue" pipe is one of the items listed on the disclosure I have to fill out. My house was built in the 1980's and my line in from the street was PB. It never failed, so I never could collect on the lawsuit...and then the funds were exhausted. I proactively had it replaced years ago...and, yes, it was out of my pocket.
I don't know how anyone can buy a house unaware of PB piping. Must have picked a poor agent and a poor home inspector, or gone carelessly without either.
Yeah blame the "dummy" consumer.
Inappropriate however you see it but where is there any indication that she bought the house after this became an issue or bought it at all? Maybe she inherited it? Maybe she had the place replumbed years ago and that's what they used? Maybe she bought the home back before anyone knew this was an issue? Perhaps unlikely but you don't really know, do you?
Professionals should never just assume things as it potentially leads to faulty conclusions, bad advice, and undermines your credibility. Assuming all kinds of things before you know the facts is one of the most basic junior level errors for anyone who provides advisory services. Junior consultants are taught this within the first week. Especially embarrassing when you start using blame language (which you should avoid anyway).
And even if you do recklessly make all these assumptions and start blaming, why use language that blames the consumer instead of the professionals who presumably had a duty to inform her? Bizarre way of looking at it.
Inappropriate however you see it but where is there any indication that she bought the house after this became an issue or bought it at all? Maybe she inherited it? Maybe she had the place replumbed years ago and that's what they used? Maybe she bought the home back before anyone knew this was an issue? Perhaps unlikely but you don't really know, do you?
Professionals should never just assume things as it potentially leads to faulty conclusions, bad advice, and undermines your credibility. Assuming all kinds of things before you know the facts is one of the most basic junior level errors for anyone who provides advisory services. Junior consultants are taught this within the first week. Especially embarrassing when you start using blame language (which you should avoid anyway).
And even if you do recklessly make all these assumptions and start blaming, why use language that blames the consumer instead of the professionals who presumably had a duty to inform her? Bizarre way of looking at it.
It is a legitimate question to ask how the OP came to buy the home and not know it had PB. Whether you agree with the method of delivery is not relevant.
It is a legitimate question to ask how the OP came to buy the home and not know it had PB. Whether you agree with the method of delivery is not relevant.
Yes, perfectly reasonable to ask an open question. Unreasonable and unprofessional to make all kinds of assumptions about what she "must have" done and unreasonable and unprofessional to use a tone of blaming. Just to repeat what was already clear in my post as you sometimes don't understand things.
Your arguing of a point that I didn't make is risking this turning into a thread hijack. I made my point clearly and I have no interest in arguing over whether asking a question is legitimate when my post was not about asking questions. I have no idea what you mean by 'method of delivery'. It was posted on a forum. That's the method of delivery. Maybe you mean tone of delivery or disposition or temperament? Who knows. I'm too busy to waste time decoding poorly articulated views or arguing about points that I didn't even make.
Hi... appreciate any suggestion/comment from someone who had experience or first hand knowledge... am in the process of closing of an old home-1966, as my offer got accepted... and just finding out about the PBT pipes as had missed on initial reading of disclosure about the pipes. We are in the process of scheduling the inspection in a week or so, but after reading all info here, should I be concern? i do have an agent helping me out...the house was updated roof/heating etc...is on septic...thank you. -emma 8/4/19
you should ask your agent. I'm not aware of Polybutylene pipes used in the 60's. If there were some odd reason they needed to replace plumbing in the late 80's-mid-90's, they certainly may have used it then.
other updates being done, septic or city, negligible effects at most.
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.
