Pool leakage discovered after home purchase

[FlyingRon]

You don't have to indicate that you are an incompetent DIYer when selling a house, in fact, the incompetency indicates you likely don't know the scope of the problems.

Now if they painted/caulked over the leaks right prior to marketing the property, you can imply an intentional act to conceal the defects. Other than that, it's far from certain. It's going to take both an expert in pools AND an attorney if push comes to shove.

 

[quincy]

I agree that it stands to be difficult.

There really is nothing more important for a prospective buyer than a pre-purchase inspection of the property. The inspection might not turn up all hidden defects but the inspection can indicate whether the buyer should be concerned about any hidden/undisclosed defects.

One house we looked at seemed great until an inspection revealed dangerous electrical wiring issues that would have required complete (and immediate) whole-house re-wiring. Our inspector informed the homeowner of the fire danger he faced if repairs were not made. We did not purchase the house.

 

[justalayman]

You don't have to indicate that you are an incompetent DIYer when selling a house, in fact, the incompetency indicates you likely don't know the scope of the problems.

Now if they painted/caulked over the leaks right prior to marketing the property, you can imply an intentional act to conceal the defects. Other than that, it's far from certain. It's going to take both an expert in pools AND an attorney if push comes to shove.

One doesn’t need to understand the extent of the problem to understand there is a problem.

Again, what hasn’t been discussed well is what the disclosure stated and that is critical in determining if there is any action available.

 

[quincy]

One doesn’t need to understand the extent of the problem to understand there is a problem.

Again, what hasn’t been discussed well is what the disclosure stated and that is critical in determining if there is any action available.

Disclosures cannot be relied on as part of any agreement to purchase a property so, regardless of what is written in a disclosure statement, it will not be enough to support a claim against the seller. More is required.

 

[justalayman]

I agree that it stands to be difficult.

There really is nothing more important for a prospective buyer than a pre-purchase inspection of the property. The inspection might not turn up all hidden defects but the inspection can indicate whether the buyer should be concerned about any hidden/undisclosed defects.gh
One house we looked at seemed great until an inspection revealed dangerous he electrical wiring issues that would have required complete (and immediate) whole-house re-wiring. Our inspector informed the homeowner of the fire danger he faced if repairs were not made. We did not purchase the house.

Fire danger? The entire electrical system?

Inspectors tend to not truly understand the issue when it comes to electrical concerns. I have rarely seen a home that required a complete re wire. Most of the time the wiring within the walls is just fine although rewiring does provide some benefit.

The source of almost all electrical fires is at the electrical panel or at receptacles. Most of all of those issues at either of those can be remedied without replacing the wiring within the walls.

Those not starting at those places are often caused by issues at one of those places mentioned, with most being due to issues at the electrical panel.


More often than not I have seen an inspector miss issues that should have been discovered. Most inspection services provide a very lightweight inspection that does little to discover issues. In one particular situstion I was visiting a friend in a recently purchased home. As I walked past the electrical panel I heard buzzing. Immediately upon opening the panel door I saw electrical code violations of improper breakers being used. Only “listed” breakers can be used in any given panel. In most cases that means name brand breakers matching name brand panels. I happened to know some of the breakers in place were not listed to be used in that panel and as such, were a code violation. Upon further inspection I discovered the buss (the metal bar the breakers connect to) were burned due to arcing (the buzzing I heard). The entire panel needed to be replaced but the “inspector” indicated the electrical system was in good and unremarkable condition.

I have seen plumbing issues that anybody would have questioned missed or ignored by “inspectors”


I don’t have a lot of faith in inspectors in general. Having worked in the real estate field, I have seen way too many issues not raised on their reports.

It’s a failing in the real estate industry that appears to go without remedy for at least 4 decades I’m aware of.

 

[quincy]

Fire danger? The entire electrical system?

Inspectors tend to not truly understand the issue when it comes to electrical concerns. I have rarely seen a home that required a complete re wire. Most of the time the wiring within the walls is just fine although rewiring does provide some benefit.

The source of almost all electrical fires is at the electrical panel or at receptacles. Most of all of those issues at either of those can be remedied without replacing the wiring within the walls.

Those not starting at those places are often caused by issues at one of those places mentioned, with most being due to issues at the electrical panel.


More often than not I have seen an inspector miss issues that should have been discovered. Most inspection services provide a very lightweight inspection that does little to discover issues. In one particular situstion I was visiting a friend in a recently purchased home. As I walked past the electrical panel I heard buzzing. Immediately upon opening the panel door I saw electrical code violations of improper breakers being used. Only “listed” breakers can be used in any given panel. In most cases that means name brand breakers matching name brand panels. I happened to know some of the breakers in place were not listed to be used in that panel and as such, were a code violation. Upon further inspection I discovered the buss (the metal bar the breakers connect to) were burned due to arcing (the buzzing I heard). The entire panel needed to be replaced but the “inspector” indicated the electrical system was in good and unremarkable condition.

I have seen plumbing issues that anybody would have questioned missed or ignored by “inspectors”


I don’t have a lot of faith in inspectors in general. Having worked in the real estate field, I have seen way too many issues not raised on their reports.

It’s a failing in the real estate industry that appears to go without remedy for at least 4 decades I’m aware of.

The fire danger came from old, uncapped wires and mouse-chewed wires found in the attic and behind socket covers, with evidence of burn.

This was a very old house (100+ years). It had a lot of charm but far more work than our budget at the time allowed.

We have used the same inspector for years and trust him to do a thorough job - but I agree that many (if not most) home inspectors do a perfunctory job.

 

[FlyingRon]

The generic "home inspectors" are really a racket. They indeed often don't find useful information and their contracts are so weasel-worded that they have no responsibility for the lackluster behavior.

However, other specialized inspections such as septic and pools have people who are more distinct knowledge and will perhaps stand behind their analysis.

 

[quincy]

The generic "home inspectors" are really a racket. They indeed often don't find useful information and their contracts are so weasel-worded that they have no responsibility for the lackluster behavior.

However, other specialized inspections such as septic and pools have people who are more distinct knowledge and will perhaps stand behind their analysis.

Who you hire definitely matters.

 

[justalayman]

The generic "home inspectors" are really a racket. They indeed often don't find useful information and their contracts are so weasel-worded that they have no responsibility for the lackluster behavior.

However, other specialized inspections such as septic and pools have people who are more distinct knowledge and will perhaps stand behind their analysis.

Having been in the real estate field myself and seeing these issues first hand, I have found very few entities selling themselves as inspectors to provide an adequate inspection. The issues in both pools and septic systems require near engineering levels of education and knowledge in multiple fields of expertise.

More often than not I see the use of an inspector be be little more than a pacifier to assuage a buyers fears. As you stated, more often than not the inspectors disclaimers allow them to escape any liability for incompetent inspections.

 

[quincy]

I still recommend that every home buyer hire an inspector to evaluate the property prior to purchase. It helps the buyer to be present during the inspection to make sure the inspector is thorough.

Many lenders require an inspection be completed, anyway.

 

[FlyingRon]

It's not the home inspection can't be useful, it's just far from comprehensive. Generally, what it gets used for is nothing other than a petty bargaining chip to get some seller concessions before closing.

I've NEVER seen a lender give a hoot about a "home inspection." Termite, septic, yes, but they realize a home inspection is rather worthless.

 

[quincy]

It's not the home inspection can't be useful, it's just far from comprehensive. Generally, what it gets used for is nothing other than a petty bargaining chip to get some seller concessions before closing.

I've NEVER seen a lender give a hoot about a "home inspection." Termite, septic, yes, but they realize a home inspection is rather worthless.

It depends on the lender and what the appraisal of the home discovers.

 

[justalayman]

It's not the home inspection can't be useful, it's just far from comprehensive. Generally, what it gets used for is nothing other than a petty bargaining chip to get some seller concessions before closing.

I've NEVER seen a lender give a hoot about a "home inspection." Termite, septic, yes, but they realize a home inspection is rather worthless.

VA backed loans as well as other lenders of federally backed loans do put a lot of weight in inspections. VA requirements are the most stringent I’ve seen.

 

[FlyingRon]

Well yes and no.

I know of NO HOME LOAN, VA, FHA, USDA that requires a "home inspection."

Most loans require an appraisal, and a few like the VA, USDA, and HUD loans require that appraisal to show that the house meets certain minimum standards (MPRs) but that's distinct from an home inspection as the term is used in general.

 

[justalayman]

Well yes and no.
Nana
I know of NO HOME LOAN, VA, FHA, USDA that requires a "home inspection."

Most loans require an appraisal, and a few like the VA, USDA, and HUD loans require that appraisal to show that the house meets certain minimum standards (MPRs) but that's distinct from an home inspection as the term is used in general.

Well, I don’t know how you know a home meets any given standard without inspecting it. Even the VA refers to it as an inspection


https://www.benefits.va.gov/roanoke/rlc/forms/ci_guide_2005.pdf

And if not an inspector, what do you call the guy that comes out and evaluates the condition of the home and determines whether the items listed meet the standards and required life expectancy of the home and its components? They always introduced themselves to me as being the inspector for the VA.