Forgone Inspection

[pjholland25]

My wife and I sold a home in Minnesota in Sept 2001. Before deciding to sell, we fixed the roof. There was an old woodstove in the basement that we were sure that we would never use. When putting the shingles on, the chimney was taken out and we covered the hole and shingled over it. We were going to remodel the basement and remove the entire woodstove assembly. When we decided to sell, I asked our realtor if I should remove it because it was not functional. He said that because of the cost of stove pipe, we should leave it in the basement and mark the "not-functional" box next to the woodstove category, thinking that the buyers would attach the chimney if necessary. We sold the house and the buyers opted not to have an inspection done. In November they tried to start a fire in the woodstove and did around $25k worth of damage. Who's fault is this? The buyers for not having the inspection done, the realtor's for not verbally telling the buyer's agent about it, or ours for not removing the woodstove? I have heard that because the disclosure was filled out(with the "not-functional" box checked off) we are liable for not making it known in advance. Our insurance company has denied the claim because we filled out the disclosure form and they think that it is the fault of the buyer for not having an inspection. What "legal" recourse do we have??

 

[HomeGuru]

It is the fault of "all" the involved parties.

Seller: for not disclosing the ENTIRE facts surrounding this stove. Not only should the disclosure statement have listed the wood stove as non-functional but an entire history should have been provided. This history should have included but not be limited to the full facts such as the chimney was removed, the roof covered over etc. AND in addition a separate disclaimer stating that the wood stove cannot be used until a licensed fireplace contractor inspects it and a new chimney, flue etc. is built and connected such that it functions in proper working order in accordance with the applicable building and safety codes. A special condition regarding this stove should have been written IN the purchase and sales contract such that the notice and agreement with respect to the actual condition of the stove was agreed to contractually by both parties.
Just the mere and nonchalant notation of the disclosure form noting that the stove was non-functional would not be sufficient because it could not even be fixed to function. In order to have this stove in working order, the various components would have to be constructed such as the chimney etc. So there is a big difference between non-functional and not being able to function at all under any circumstance.


Looking back, I bet you would agree that it would have been safer to just have removed the stove such that it was not part of the sale.
SELLER"S AGENT: for the same reasons as stated above.

BUYER: for not getting a home inspection and for not verifying that the stove had a means to exhaust combusible to the exterior of the home by means of a chimney.

Hire a real estate asap to review your contract and disclosure documents and advise you acordingly.
Also advise your real estate agent to do the same and notify their errors and ommissions insurance carrier.

 

[pjholland25]

Is that not why we pay commission to our agent?? I am a complete idiot when it comes to real estate which is why I agreed to have 1/3 of what we profited on the sale of the house appropriated to real estate agents. I agree, I should have taken the woodburning stove and had we moved forward with our plan to remodel, It would have been gone. But, "at the advise of our realtor" we left it in. We had multiple offers on the house a few hours after it was listed and I think that in order to make their offer look better, they took out the inspection contingency. I don't feel that i was hiding anything. If I would have known that all of those steps should have been taken, I would have been happy to either comply or just remove the woodstove. Now, because our realtor did not take the proper steps, we are probably going to be forced to hire an atty...If you hire me to do your taxes because I am a licensed accountant and you know nothing about tax law, etc.., wouldn't an unfavorable audit fall back on the accountants lap????? Why hire anyone if it's going to get screwed up anyway..Please explain this to me so that I can refrain from puplicly bashing Real Estate Agents.

 

[HomeGuru]

Is that not why we pay commission to our agent?? I am a complete idiot when it comes to real estate which is why I agreed to have 1/3 of what we profited on the sale of the house appropriated to real estate agents.
**A: don't make things sound like you gave up a lot. Realtors get paid a commission which in most cases is 6% of the sales price. It is not the agents fault that you made such little net profit on the sale that the actual dollar amount in real estate commissions equated to 1/3 of your net profit. Although, it is your agent's fault for not advising you properly with respect to hiring an attorney, proper disclosure, contract writing etc.
********************
***************


I agree, I should have taken the woodburning stove and had we moved forward with our plan to remodel, It would have been gone. But, "at the advise of our realtor" we left it in.

**A: then the Realtor should have followed through and advised you of the points in my post above.
**************


We had multiple offers on the house a few hours after it was listed and I think that in order to make their offer look better, they took out the inspection contingency.
**A: if I was the Seller or even the Realtor for the Seller, I would say that removing the home inspection contingency would not make an offer look better.
I would insist that a Buyer conduct a home inspection no matter what.
*****************

I don't feel that i was hiding anything. If I would have known that all of those steps should have been taken, I would have been happy to either comply or just remove the woodstove. Now, because our realtor did not take the proper steps, we are probably going to be forced to hire an atty...If you hire me to do your taxes because I am a licensed accountant and you know nothing about tax law, etc.., wouldn't an unfavorable audit fall back on the accountants lap?????
**A: no, not in all cases. Please note that your Realtor is not a real estate attorney. As such, you should have sought out legal consultation concerning legal matters of contract and disclosure law etc.
Read your contract very carefully as I am sure there is language
to that effect.
*******************
Why hire anyone if it's going to get screwed up anyway..Please explain this to me so that I can refrain from puplicly bashing Real Estate Agents.

**A: you are generalizing here and that is unfair to the thousands of very capable and professional Realtors.
I would agree with you that your Realtor messed up. That is why you need to go back to this person and have a meeting with their principal broker to discuss this specific situation.