Confess: What did you conceal from buyers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.

I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

They knew it was wet, it was obvious in the inspection. Because we didn't cover it up.

There is no such thing as a perfect house without defects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.

I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

You're naive - basements are NEVER completely dry. They are below grade. Ever heard of gravity? Which way do you think water flows?

All new homes must be water proofed Angus interior exterior weeping systems, basements are supposed to be dry idiot

[Anonymous]

I think almost all buyers of homes experience some sort of issue during the course of the 1st year of owning their house. In the first year of owning our house we learned: upstairs bath doesn't have insulation under it (over garage) and it's FREEZING when it's cold, many windows get fuzzy due to moisture between the window panes, you can hear highway noise at night (not at all during the day - which is when we looked at the house), and plenty of other things. Clearly the prior owners knew about these problems but didn't share it with us. It is what it is- we bought it, had an inspection and missed these issues. No animosity toward the prior owners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.

x
I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

You're naive - basements are NEVER completely dry. They are below grade. Ever heard of gravity? Which way do you think water flows?

All new homes must be water proofed Angus interior exterior weeping systems, basements are supposed to be dry idiot

Nope, you're the idiot. Unless the basement was meant for habitation and designed to stay dry, it won't be. Why do you think people put sump pumps in there or de-humidifiers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.

I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

They knew it was wet, it was obvious in the inspection. Because we didn't cover it up.

There is no such thing as a perfect house without defects.

Then you didn't conceal anything, which is what this thread is about. I think there's a big difference between not highlighting a house's "quirks" as a PP called it (everyone buys knowing a home and/or neighborhood will have some issues) and doing shady stuff to conceal a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.

x
I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

You're naive - basements are NEVER completely dry. They are below grade. Ever heard of gravity? Which way do you think water flows?

All new homes must be water proofed Angus interior exterior weeping systems, basements are supposed to be dry idiot

Nope, you're the idiot. Unless the basement was meant for habitation and designed to stay dry, it won't be. Why do you think people put sump pumps in there or de-humidifiers?

Sump pumps are preventative. My newish house has one and has never been wet a day in it's life. Sump pumps redirect water away from the foundation better than any landscaping can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

[u]I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.[i][u]

I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

They knew it was wet, it was obvious in the inspection. Because we didn't cover it up.

There is no such thing as a perfect house without defects.

Then you didn't [i]conceal anything, which is what this thread is about. I think there's a big difference between not highlighting a house's "quirks" as a PP called it (everyone buys knowing a home and/or neighborhood will have some issues) and doing shady stuff to conceal a problem.

Thats what I said.

[Anonymous]

PP, there is a difference between "not trying to cover anything up" and fulfilling your duty as sellers to disclose certain issues with the house. You may not have concealed -- "they knew it was wet, it was obvious in the inspection" -- but the q

[Anonymous]

Sorry, hit submit too soon. Let's try again:

PP, there is a difference between "not trying to cover anything up" and fulfilling your duty as sellers to disclose certain issues with the house. You may not have concealed -- "they knew it was wet, it was obvious in the inspection" -- but the question is did you properly disclose?

In Maryland (where I live) the disclosure form specifically asks about moisture in basements:

2. Basement: Any leaks or evidence of moisture? ? Yes ? No ? Unknown ? Does Not Apply

http://latshaw.net/images/Maryland_Residential_Property_Disclosure_and_Disclaimer_Form.pdf

Yet people who KNOW they get water in the basement often tick "No" or "Unknown" -- because they know a wet basement may scare buyers away.

That's shady. I don't know whether that applies to your situation or not, but it applies to far too many home sales in this area.

[Anonymous]

You're not required to make any disclosures in Virginia. I would if I were, but I'm not.

But as a buyer I would never rely on those kinds of disclosures, for the reasons you noted. We escaped by the skin of our teeth from buying an otherwise very cool house in Bethesda - the disclosures were not too bad, but the inspection was dreadful and the house wasn't priced as a tear-down.

Buyer beware.

[Anonymous]

Depends,my 1930s home has unfinished basement(cinderblock) which has never had water/wet issues. Knock on wood.

Might be because my back of the house is paver patio and sloped down.
I was surprised I didnt have any issues yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We generally leave our sold homes in beautiful condition. One home we sold recently was a fixer that we hadn't totally renovated, we'd just selectively dealt with some things. The basement wasn't completely dry, there were wiring issues, etc. We didn't try to cover anything up, but we didn't go out of our way to point things out, either. Not our job and the house was priced appropriately for its condition.

Our current place is a large rural tract with a decrepit late victorian home and outbuildings. Until we did the inspection, we were going to renovate. But the former owners had let it deteriorate so much it's a lost cause, so we're going to build new instead. We did a really good (and expensive) inspection, found out all the things that were wrong, negotiated a small price reduction and decided to take the risk. The prior owners had been convicted multiple times of government contracting fraud, so I am not surprised they were lax in maintaining the place.

I think some people in this thread are confusing "buyer beware" with affirmative misrepresentations/cover-ups. Only the latter is wrong, IMO. The inspection is how you protect yourself. If you waive it, or only do a cursory one with the agent's inspector recommendation, it's all on you.

x
I hate people like you, basements should never be wet, i guess karma is gonna get you with your old rural home

You're naive - basements are NEVER completely dry. They are below grade. Ever heard of gravity? Which way do you think water flows?

All new homes must be water proofed Angus interior exterior weeping systems, basements are supposed to be dry idiot

Nope, you're the idiot. Unless the basement was meant for habitation and designed to stay dry, it won't be. Why do you think people put sump pumps in there or de-humidifiers?

Sump pumps are preventative. My newish house has one and has never been wet a day in it's life. Sump pumps redirect water away from the foundation better than any landscaping can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Painted over a water stain on the basement ceiling. It probably reappeared after the next big rain storm.

As a side note, I sold a car that once had a mouse die in the trunk (in July). It took months to get the dead mouse smell out of the car but I finally did. I did not see any reason to reveal to the new owners that the tragedy had ever occurred.

If your disclosure statement indicated there was water damage (flood) over 5 years ago in the basement but did not mention the water stain on the basement ceiling, what is buyer's recourse after discovering the stain a few months after purchase of home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We had to sell our house in the summer because of how bad the windows were. They looked new but with the windows closed the wind coming in would make the curtains move. There was somehow a leak where the roof met the gutter. Water only came in when ice melted off. Probably a sheathing issue.

You are an awful human being.

Okay wait - this person ^^^^ is an awful human being but the person who didn't disclose to their foreign buyers that most of their 4 acres were going to be taken via eminent domain is an okay human being??

What PP did is really nothing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Painted over a water stain on the basement ceiling. It probably reappeared after the next big rain storm.

As a side note, I sold a car that once had a mouse die in the trunk (in July). It took months to get the dead mouse smell out of the car but I finally did. I did not see any reason to reveal to the new owners that the tragedy had ever occurred.

If your disclosure statement indicated there was water damage (flood) over 5 years ago in the basement but did not mention the water stain on the basement ceiling, what is buyer's recourse after discovering the stain a few months after purchase of home?

Beats me. The house was sold 17 years ago and I haven't heard a peep from them since then so I guess it's good. I know they still live there. There was never flood damage in the house. I think the problem was just a bad seal around a door above that spot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OMFG. Thank you for the 8 page list of things to check next time we buy a home (jerks)........

This + 1 bazillion!!!