Anonymous wrote:OP- is this your first home? I agree foundation issues are concerning, but I also know that home inspectors are not necessarily experts. You are paying them to find problems. Many are good, but miss massive defects or can overstate others. Why don’t you just ask the listing agent? Whenever we have looked at homes, our agent will just ask the listing agent to see what they say. I live in VA, so no experience with MD, but not wanting to know what a potential buyer’s inspection finds pretty much real estate 101. Agent is just looking out for her clients, especially since you aren’t even in a contractual relationship. We’ve sold multiple homes. Every house has issues but no salesperson will tell you to emphasize the negatives. If you’re uncomfortable, just pass.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, did the house sell with no contingencies? Having to waive the inspection contingency to win in this market makes me so nervous...

Tomorrow is the deadline for offers and I'm sure this will sell quickly (lots of foot traffic and interest because it was priced for a bidding war). I feel like it is very rare to have an inspection contingency these days, which makes me hope whoever gets it did their due diligence up front.

I wouldn't sweat it. You seem to be very invested in the house-disaster scenario, but people have been living there, presumably without incident. The house is still standing. It's pretty rare for houses to just collapse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, did the house sell with no contingencies? Having to waive the inspection contingency to win in this market makes me so nervous...

Tomorrow is the deadline for offers and I'm sure this will sell quickly (lots of foot traffic and interest because it was priced for a bidding war). I feel like it is very rare to have an inspection contingency these days, which makes me hope whoever gets it did their due diligence up front.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?

I dont think it's illegal but the listing agent has made ir completely clear not to do it and I think buyers could face potential civil damages.

I think you are making this up. Just from a quick search, in at least two states, it is illegal for a seller to refuse a buyer's inspection report when the buyer wants to share it.

LOL. Are you a real estate attorney? What states are you talking about? All I'm saying is that it is not uncommon for listing agents in the DMV to write in their disclosures that agents are not to provide results from a preinspection to the sellers' agent.

You insinuated that the buyer could be liable for legal damages if they disclose to the agent - that is patently false. Stop spreading lies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?

I dont think it's illegal but the listing agent has made ir completely clear not to do it and I think buyers could face potential civil damages.

I think you are making this up. Just from a quick search, in at least two states, it is illegal for a seller to refuse a buyer's inspection report when the buyer wants to share it.

LOL. Are you a real estate attorney? What states are you talking about? All I'm saying is that it is not uncommon for listing agents in the DMV to write in their disclosures that agents are not to provide results from a preinspection to the sellers' agent.

Massachusetts & Texas.

https://www.texasrealestate.com/members/posts/can-a-seller-or-listing-agent-refuse-to-receive-the-inspection-report/

https://4buyersre.com/pre-inspections-bad-for-sellers/
The prospective buyers can write to the agent and say “we are not making an offer because there is sill damage due to termites.” If they do that, the seller and their agent are obligated to tell other prospective buyers about this defect. If you don’t, you are hiding it. Guess what, that’s against the law. Again.

I could do some real research but my guess is you are a shady seller or seller's agent trying to scare buyers from disclosing inspection reports to sellers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?

I dont think it's illegal but the listing agent has made ir completely clear not to do it and I think buyers could face potential civil damages.

I think you are making this up. Just from a quick search, in at least two states, it is illegal for a seller to refuse a buyer's inspection report when the buyer wants to share it.

LOL. Are you a real estate attorney? What states are you talking about? All I'm saying is that it is not uncommon for listing agents in the DMV to write in their disclosures that agents are not to provide results from a preinspection to the sellers' agent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?

I dont think it's illegal but the listing agent has made ir completely clear not to do it and I think buyers could face potential civil damages.

I think you are making this up. Just from a quick search, in at least two states, it is illegal for a seller to refuse a buyer's inspection report when the buyer wants to share it.

LOL. Are you a real estate attorney? What states are you talking about? All I'm saying is that it is not uncommon for listing agents in the DMV to write in their disclosures that agents are not to provide results from a preinspection to the sellers' agent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?

I dont think it's illegal but the listing agent has made ir completely clear not to do it and I think buyers could face potential civil damages.

I think you are making this up. Just from a quick search, in at least two states, it is illegal for a seller to refuse a buyer's inspection report when the buyer wants to share it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?

I dont think it's illegal but the listing agent has made ir completely clear not to do it and I think buyers could face potential civil damages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On several properties we have recently looked at, listing agent makes it clear that information learned during a pre-inspection is for our purposes only and should not be shared with the listing agent.

I understand that in this market, pre-inspection findings are not usually points of negotiation but solely information for potential buyers. But this reeks to me of "knowing" there is something wrong, but wanting plausible deniability (la la la, holding my ears) if they never 'actually' learn it is an issue.

In one of these houses, we scheduled a pre-inspection and within 5 mins, the inspector found a huge crack in the foundation that seemed to span the length of the house. It was obvious there were several previous attempts to patch (cover) the crack but it re-emerged. Inspector's opinion was to walk away from the house, and we did - no regrets. But I have to believe both the seller and listing agent "know" about this and are trying to sell the house without having to disclose.

My lesson in all of this -- a pre-inspection is money WELL-spent. Major bullet dodged.

Anyone else think this is completely unethical of the agent/seller? Are you at all concerned if a listing agent writes this about a property you are considering?

It is completely standard protocol for listing agents to write that they dont want info from a preinspection to be shared with the sellers. In some cases the listing agents will write that if info is shared with them about

problems found in the preinspections, that the buyers/agents could be held responsible for any consequences that the sellers face as a result.

How is this legal? Can you point to a law that says this? Assuming no contract in place with buyer, how can this be required?