What typical after a pre-dry wall inspection to prove changes were made ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

+1

[Anonymous]

Ugh, I'm so mad for you OP. They are taking advantage. A walkthrough is a norm. How do you know the photos are real?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, I'm so mad for you OP. They are taking advantage. A walkthrough is a norm.

OP's agent screwed up badly here. I don't entirely blame the builders. It's not uncommon to sell a new house without a walkthrough, and it sure would be uncommon to add a contingency after a contract is signed.

Anonymous wrote:How do you know the photos are real?

I wouldn't be concerned about fake photos. I would be concerned about inadequate fixes for code violations. At the point at which the builder has already screwed up, it's hardly a significant ask that they demonstrate the fixes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

Agreed. But there's a difference between suggesting something, requesting something, demanding something, and refusing to close without something. That last category is where OP could really get in trouble and needs to be careful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

Agreed. But there's a difference between suggesting something, requesting something, demanding something, and refusing to close without something. That last category is where OP could really get in trouble and needs to be careful.

Op here. If they don't provide photos, we will back out. We are prepared to lose the earnest money, which is 20k. It would suck, but we have talked about it. We aren't originally from the US. We should have read more about new construction.

[Anonymous]

The person who inspected it should go back to verify that everything was fixed. Easy. If they don’t allow that, run. I can imagine them not wanting you personally there because you clearly know nothing about building and would just get in the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

Agreed. But there's a difference between suggesting something, requesting something, demanding something, and refusing to close without something. That last category is where OP could really get in trouble and needs to be careful.

Op here. If they don't provide photos, we will back out. We are prepared to lose the earnest money, which is 20k. It would suck, but we have talked about it. We aren't originally from the US. We should have read more about new construction.

You could lose a lot more than earnest money, OP. The sellers might be able to sue you for specific performance (forcing you to buy) or for damages (the difference between your offer and a later sale price). The latter could be really bad if the housing market dips.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

Agreed. But there's a difference between suggesting something, requesting something, demanding something, and refusing to close without something. That last category is where OP could really get in trouble and needs to be careful.

Op here. If they don't provide photos, we will back out. We are prepared to lose the earnest money, which is 20k. It would suck, but we have talked about it. We aren't originally from the US. We should have read more about new construction.

You could lose a lot more than earnest money, OP. The sellers might be able to sue you for specific performance (forcing you to buy) or for damages (the difference between your offer and a later sale price). The latter could be really bad if the housing market dips.

+1

OP, I'm sorry that you don't have a better agent guiding you through these decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The person who inspected it should go back to verify that everything was fixed. Easy. If they don’t allow that, run. I can imagine them not wanting you personally there because you clearly know nothing about building and would just get in the way.

They won't allow that and it's not common for inspection companies to re-inspect

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who inspected it should go back to verify that everything was fixed. Easy. If they don’t allow that, run. I can imagine them not wanting you personally there because you clearly know nothing about building and would just get in the way.

They won't allow that and it's not common for inspection companies to re-inspect

Why wouldn’t they allow the same building inspector back? Considering they really shouldn’t have any code violations at all in a new construction anyway, that sounds like a very unreasonable restriction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who inspected it should go back to verify that everything was fixed. Easy. If they don’t allow that, run. I can imagine them not wanting you personally there because you clearly know nothing about building and would just get in the way.

They won't allow that and it's not common for inspection companies to re-inspect

Why wouldn’t they allow the same building inspector back? Considering they really shouldn’t have any code violations at all in a new construction anyway, that sounds like a very unreasonable restriction.

(Assuming that OP pays for a second inspection if necessary)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

Agreed. But there's a difference between suggesting something, requesting something, demanding something, and refusing to close without something. That last category is where OP could really get in trouble and needs to be careful.

Op here. If they don't provide photos, we will back out. We are prepared to lose the earnest money, which is 20k. It would suck, but we have talked about it. We aren't originally from the US. We should have read more about new construction.

You could lose a lot more than earnest money, OP. The sellers might be able to sue you for specific performance (forcing you to buy) or for damages (the difference between your offer and a later sale price). The latter could be really bad if the housing market dips.

Then how are all these instances of building contracts being backed out of around the country happening? OP, if they refuse to provide proof that the code violations were fixed, I would immediately spend a few hundred dollars and consult a real estate attorney on what your options are per your contract. Them refusing to prove that they fixed them, either through photos or a follow-up inspection, is very shady. This is too big an issue and the dollars will be well worth it in a purchase that costs substantially more than that.

I also agree that you need to be much more succinct and not sound like you’re asking a favor, that you’d “like” this in your communication with them. Now that you’ve said you’re from overseas I can understand the language issues better. This is also something your lawyer can help with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Refuse to close without photos, that is your best argument.

This may not be a good idea. If OP is already in a contract and this isn't a contingency provided in the contract, OP could be in breach. That would be dangerous. Moreover, this is the nuclear option and will demolish what (likely little) good will remains with the builders and sellers.

There's no point in allowing a third party inspection if they can't give photos—that's shady.

Agreed. But there's a difference between suggesting something, requesting something, demanding something, and refusing to close without something. That last category is where OP could really get in trouble and needs to be careful.

Op here. If they don't provide photos, we will back out. We are prepared to lose the earnest money, which is 20k. It would suck, but we have talked about it. We aren't originally from the US. We should have read more about new construction.

You could lose a lot more than earnest money, OP. The sellers might be able to sue you for specific performance (forcing you to buy) or for damages (the difference between your offer and a later sale price). The latter could be really bad if the housing market dips.

Then how are all these instances of building contracts being backed out of around the country happening? OP, if they refuse to provide proof that the code violations were fixed, I would immediately spend a few hundred dollars and consult a real estate attorney on what your options are per your contract. Them refusing to prove that they fixed them, either through photos or a follow-up inspection, is very shady. This is too big an issue and the dollars will be well worth it in a purchase that costs substantially more than that.

I also agree that you need to be much more succinct and not sound like you’re asking a favor, that you’d “like” this in your communication with them. Now that you’ve said you’re from overseas I can understand the language issues better. This is also something your lawyer can help with.

Should the addendum include that photos or a walkthrough will be given? Right now, they have said we will not negotiate a walkthrough. They want us to decide if we want the inspection still and sign it.