new construction home placed on lot incorrectly. need an attorney?

[MagicForest]

Hello-

I'm writing from Georgia.
Our slab home is in the process of being built. We purchased the largest lot, which is on a cul-de-sac. When we went to visit the home site (for my husband's first time) we noticed the builder placed our home on our lot in an odd place and the home next door is essentially in front of our house and way to close. Based on our contract, the builder has the right to place the home on the lot without discussion with us. But now, our house is way to close to the neighbor and (as previously mentioned, in front of our house.

We have a call tomorrow to discuss this problem with the builders. My question is...do we need a lawyer with us on this call? Thank you for your opinion on this.

 

[justalayman]

If the builder has the right to place the home where he chooses, unless there is some code violation involved, I don’t see what you can force the builder to do.



And why would you even agree to you not having input as to where the home is placed? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me

 

[Just Blue]

If the builder has the right to place the home where he chooses, unless there is some code violation involved, I don’t see what you can force the builder to do.



And why would you even agree to you not having input as to where the home is placed? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me

I was thinking the same thing...

 

[MagicForest]

They didn't ask us anything about placement of the home before they starting building and we didn't think of it. As a home buyer, who is not a builder or a lawyer, it didn't readily occur to us that the builder would make this type of a mistake/decision. I didn't enter my question to on this forum to hear what we should have or should not have done in this situation. With this line of reasoning, I suppose I should have made sure prior to building that they didn't build the house backwards. Assuming you want to HELP me and not point out what I should have done, please try to place yourself in my shoes and answer my original question. We are under a contract for a house that we feel the placement was incorrect. Should we have a lawyer present for the first call with the builder? Please only respond if you want to help my future not analyze the past.

 

[Just Blue]

They didn't ask us anything about placement of the home before they starting building and we didn't think of it. As a home buyer, who is not a builder or a lawyer, it didn't readily occur to us that the builder would make this type of a mistake/decision. I didn't enter my question to on this forum to hear what we should have or should not have done in this situation. With this line of reasoning, I suppose I should have made sure prior to building that they didn't build the house backwards. Assuming you want to HELP me and not point out what I should have done, please try to place yourself in my shoes and answer my original question. We are under a contract for a house that we feel the placement was incorrect. Should we have a lawyer present for the first call with the builder? Please only respond if you want to help my future not analyze the past.

Wow! How over-reactive and rude. Hire an attorney.

 

[justalayman]

They didn't ask us anything about placement of the home before they starting building and we didn't think of it. As a home buyer, who is not a builder or a lawyer, it didn't readily occur to us that the builder would make this type of a mistake/decision. I didn't enter my question to on this forum to hear what we should have or should not have done in this situation. With this line of reasoning, I suppose I should have made sure prior to building that they didn't build the house backwards. Assuming you want to HELP me and not point out what I should have done, please try to place yourself in my shoes and answer my original question. We are under a contract for a house that we feel the placement was incorrect. Should we have a lawyer present for the first call with the builder? Please only respond if you want to help my future not analyze the past.

Yes, it sounds like it would have been a good idea to make sure they didn’t build it backwards.

As I said, I don’t see any options short of paying the contractor to start over unless there is a code violation as it is situated.

Given the value of the issue it would not hurt to at least have an attorney to consult. I don’t necessarily see an immediate need for them to be there. Just don’t commit to anything.

 

[HRZ]

OP, don't bite the hand of volunteers who may be able to offer valuable suggestions , ... if you bought the most valuable lot and failed to pay attention to the placement of the various ,homes to be built ...in my area expect to,pay $!350"per,hour to,have counsel review,your plight ..and conclude you,have no practical,options .

 

[adjusterjack]

do we need a lawyer with us on this call?

I doubt if it will make any difference tomorrow if you have one or not. The builder is likely to tell you that's where it has to be put.

Whether you can do anything about it depends on what stage of the construction it's in. If only the footings have been dug, it should be easy enough to re-arrange the position of the house. If the concrete has already been poured it's going to take a lawsuit to stop the construction and reposition the house and that's going to be quite costly, with little possibility of success because your contract gives the builder the option of positioning the house.

Before you commit to spending a lot of money on a lawyer, I have to tell you that for the past couple of months I have been looking at homes specifically on cul de sac lots and I have seen many that are positioned on lots in a way that defies logic, at least defies my logic and the phrase "What were they thinking?" floats into my mind.

I suggest you go to google maps and look at aerial views of cul de sac lots pretty much anywhere in your city and see how the homes are positioned on the lots. You might see similar positioning.

Keep in mind that the builder is limited by setback requirements and utility easements. Might not have been any choice.

 

[NeilTheCop]

I was under the impression that when a building permit is issued it would state exactly where the house was to be located. For a builder to say "I think it should go here instead" then build it where he decided rather than where it was permitted is, to say the least, odd.

 

[Zigner]

I was under the impression that when a building permit is issued it would state exactly where the house was to be located. For a builder to say "I think it should go here instead" then build it where he decided rather than where it was permitted is, to say the least, odd.

Why do you believe that the house is not located where the permit allows? All we have here is a buyer who said "build it wherever on the lot you want" (by way of a signed contract), and is now complaining about where it was built.

 

[not2cleverRed]

I was under the impression that when a building permit is issued it would state exactly where the house was to be located. For a builder to say "I think it should go here instead" then build it where he decided rather than where it was permitted is, to say the least, odd.

It is very likely that the house is being built exactly as stated in the permit application.

OP has indicated that their sole knowledge of the process was observing what was being done on the site. OP is not alleging that the construction does not comply with the permit, but rather, that it violates their sense of aesthetics.

 

[adjusterjack]

I was under the impression that when a building permit is issued it would state exactly where the house was to be located.

The "permit" itself says no such thing. The "permit" is issued based on plans and specifications that the builder presents to the building department when applying for the permit.

Those plans should include a diagram of the lot showing the position of the house and the distance from the lot lines along with any setback lines and utility easement lines.

You can (and should) ask the builder for a complete duplicate set of plans that were submitted to the building department or you can go to the city and view the plans that are on file there.

 

[Zigner]

The "permit" itself says no such thing. The "permit" is issued based on plans and specifications that the builder presents to the building department when applying for the permit.

If the builder doesn't build according to the plans and specifications that are presented and approved, then the structure is not being built as allowed in the permit. In other words, once the plans, etc., are submitted and approved, they are incorporated as part of the permit.

 

[adjusterjack]

If the builder doesn't build according to the plans and specifications that are presented and approved, then the structure is not being built as allowed in the permit. In other words, once the plans, etc., are submitted and approved, they are incorporated as part of the permit.

I think that's the point I made.

 

[Zigner]

I think that's the point I made.

You said that the permit says no such thing. I disagree. The designs are incorporated as a part of the permit.