• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Disclosure dispute

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

W

wingate

Guest
We sold our home a few months ago in Georgia. The buyers had a home inspection, and all known repair needs were resolved. No further existing problems were noted on my seller's disclosure statement because I wasn't aware of any.

I have been contacted by the buyer and notified that water damage to the floor and sub-flooring near the entrance had surfaced after it rained, and that it is their opinion I "should've known about it and disclosed it." Such damage was not noticed by myself or the home inspector. How could a situation like this play out in court if it winds up there, and what burden of proof would they need to justify their claim that I "knew" about damage not visible on the surface?
 


W

wingate

Guest
HomeGuru,

Two things are being said about the water. One is that there is a stain on the ceiling in the upstairs bedroom that is above the areas in question, a stain that was not there while we lived there, was not noticed by the buyer or her agent during two walks, and wasn't noticed by the home inspector. There was no sign of a roof leak nor was one noted by the inspector.

The second possible source is that water came in from outside at one of the upstairs windows, went down the walls and came out of one of the downstairs windows in the kitchen.

During our six years living there, there were rare instances of water coming in near the kitchen windows after very lengthy, heavy rains coupled with high winds. There is a stone facing on the side of the house where the windows are, so I assumed that the wind enabled water to find a way in. The water was never a large amount, handled with paper towels or a bath towel. It never happened enough to cause concern that some sort of repair would be needed. I didn't disclose this information due to the fact that, to the best of my knowledge, no problem existed due to water damage.

The areas where they say the sub-flooring is damaged never gave evidence of a problem underneath. The buyer expects me to pay for the repairs under the assumption that I knew of the damage, that it had to have been obvious, but if it were that obvious, her home inspector should have noticed something when he checked the crawlspace for moisture problems.

Who would have the heavier burden of proof in court, me or her?
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
wingate said:
HomeGuru,

Two things are being said about the water. One is that there is a stain on the ceiling in the upstairs bedroom that is above the areas in question, a stain that was not there while we lived there, was not noticed by the buyer or her agent during two walks, and wasn't noticed by the home inspector. There was no sign of a roof leak nor was one noted by the inspector.

The second possible source is that water came in from outside at one of the upstairs windows, went down the walls and came out of one of the downstairs windows in the kitchen.

During our six years living there, there were rare instances of water coming in near the kitchen windows after very lengthy, heavy rains coupled with high winds. There is a stone facing on the side of the house where the windows are, so I assumed that the wind enabled water to find a way in. The water was never a large amount, handled with paper towels or a bath towel. It never happened enough to cause concern that some sort of repair would be needed. I didn't disclose this information due to the fact that, to the best of my knowledge, no problem existed due to water damage.

**A: you lose on this count since you failed to disclose this information however small to you, you can now see that the condition is a major concern to the Buyer.
***********




The areas where they say the sub-flooring is damaged never gave evidence of a problem underneath. The buyer expects me to pay for the repairs under the assumption that I knew of the damage, that it had to have been obvious, but if it were that obvious, her home inspector should have noticed something when he checked the crawlspace for moisture problems.

Who would have the heavier burden of proof in court, me or her?

**A: what is the cause of this subfloor damage? Termites, leaking drain or plumbing pipes etc. Even if the problem was a one time occurance, the condition should still have been disclosed. What if there were no waterproofing between the stone and the wall, what if the window frames were not property caulked, what if there was a hurricane and the house was flooded at this wall. If you had disclosed this condition, the Buyer would then have the option of accepting "as-is" or hiring their own expert to determine the cause and extent of the problem. Because you failed to bring this matter up, you did not help them and give them a choice to conduct further investigation.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top