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.
Just had survey done, couple issues, but the one that bothers me most is the original owner had 1.423 acre land, when she sold it, it seems she split the property and sold .66 of just land to someone and the other part of the land and home to the current owners, at least it seems to appear to happen that way, though for some reason current owners signed a quit claim deed for that .66, so I'm really not sure who actually sold it.
From the beginning, the MLS showed the property being on .82 acre and when I checked the county property records, it shows .823 acres. Obviously, the math just doesn't work out right if you take. 1.423 - .66 I found the deed listed for the part of the land that was sold, and it does say .66 acre in the deed.
The surveyor came up with .77, which would add up, but is a deficit of .053 in land, which amounts to 2309 less square feet than I thought I was purchasing, which is an area bigger than the house itself.
I asked if the owners had a survey quite a while ago, during negotiations, and was told they never had one done. Wouldn't it have been required by their lender, especially after splitting the property? I found the survey (or drawing of the land, I think it's called the plat) on line for the part that was sold. I would think someone had to do a new survey for both parts. How does the county know where the property lines are on their website if none was ever done and filed? Would the county having just the survey for the sold .66 part, be sufficient for them to figure out the land for both lots? And now I'm wondering how and why the county website lists the land at .823, which the current owners have been paying taxes on. I looked up their tax bill and it does indeed show .823 acre,
My main question though, what calculation can I use to find the dollar amount to renegotiate the price since there is less property than what I thought I was getting? I don't want to pay for something I'm not getting and my offer was on it being .823 acre, not .77
My atty just wrote and said the listing agent is asking for a copy of my survey. I told her before I'd consider releasing it, I want to know why he needs it?? I can't see a reason other than possibly showing the owners there's a discrepancy, and I haven't even voiced my views to my realtor yet. It seems this listing agent originally sold the house to the current owners, whether he was a buyers or dual agent I don't know, but you would think he'd have known the acreage was incorrect! I can't think of any reason he'd want my survey other than using it to try to get money back for his clients from the county for overpaying, if something like that is even possible. They've owned the property for less than 6yrs.
Any one deal with this issue before, and if so, what was the outcome? Any opinions, suggestions, thoughts?
It's good that you've done your research before the closing! You say you're still interested in buying the property, so why not let your attorney or buyer's agent go ahead and negotiate a lower price? Don't be stingy with the results of your survey- be cooperative and use it as a negotiating tool.
The land and buildings are generally assessed separately in the records for tax purposes so the county tax assessor should be able to tell you what the percentages would be for the land.
I'd offer a reduced price not just strictly based on the lot discrepancy, but add some for the cost of your survey and the fact that you'll have to pay to get all of this cleared up with the county, the title policy and searchers, etc.
Location: Mokelumne Hill, CA & El Pescadero, BCS MX.
6,957 posts, read 22,302,067 times
Reputation: 6471
You made an offer on a piece of property which you probably would have walked around and been shown the corners. Visually you probably had an idea of what you were buying. Whether it's 2500sf more or 2500sf less what you saw, it is what you're buying. In my area, we have much larger parcels and very little flat ground. We also have a lot of ground that hasn't been surveyed for more than 100 years and needless to say, modern survey techniques can change the size of the original parcel by 10% or more. Usually the revelation is met with a "Gee, that's interesting" comment and everyone just walks away knowing they now have an accurate survey.
If this was prime farmland, there might be some reason to make an adjustment on the price, as there would be value to being able to produce income from the land. I just don't see it being worth the amount you're going to have to spend to make a difference in your price. If you are really looking for a solution, your assessor may separate the value of the land and the improvements (That's the way it's done in CA, it may be different in your state) and you could do some simple math to determine the ratio of land to improvements.
For the sake of argument lets assume:
$150,000 total assessed value. $50,000 is land and $100,000 improvements. so the deficit amount of land (.053/.77) represents a 6.9% decrease in the value of the land or $3441 decrease in value. That's just the simple math, usually land is anywhere from 15% to 25% of the total valuation, not 33% as in my example.
If I was the seller, I wouldn't be in much of a hurry to re-negotiate the price with you. Until your survey, they were representing the property as they knew it to be.
In my area, that difference in land would be worth nothing. I'm with MikeJ that you have a REALTOR and an attorney who have read your contract and I assume at least one of them has seen what you are buying. They are in the best position to tell you what, if anything, the difference is worth.
In my area, that difference would mean nothing. MLS always says the information is deemed reliable but not guaranteed. In Texas, you can only publish information on the MLS that has a record somewhere and if the tax records showed the higher amount, that's the number that has to be used. You can't say "per owner" the lot is this size. Without an official document, it means nothing. It looks like the listing agent did what she was supposed to do which was using the tax number, and then your surveyor came up with information that was "not guaranteed" on the MLS.
Its actually .053, not .023 acres of discrepency. That is almost the size of my entire lot. I'm on a townhouse lot, and it is only .07 acres. So I don't think of that size as "little to no value", thank you very much. I think on a lot of less than 1 acre, that is a large enough discrepency to be of value.
For example. What if there was a restriction that said that lot splits cannot create lots of less than .4 acres each? If the lot is .823, you can split the lot, but if it is only .77, you now cannot. That significantly affects the potential value.
We don't know enough about the specifics to give informed advice, to be honest. Go with your attorney and realtor's advice, since they know the property and we don't.
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.
Suppose to close on a house next week. 
I found the deed listed for the part of the land that was sold, and it does say .66 acre in the deed.
