hausdok Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 In this Ohio case, a seller disclosed some basement water intrusion and characterized it as "minor." The buyer's agent urged the buyer to have the home inspected but the buyer declined and agreed to an "as is" sale. After the buyer moved in and the basement flooded, the buyer sued the seller, alleging fraud. The court found in favor of the seller. To read more about this case, click here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Moore Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Once we find a cure for cancer, I hope we can start working on stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 You can't fix stupid...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 It might just be me, but it seems an inspection would not have found the two major issues the plantiff had. Also, it got tossed for procedure, not for merit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Raymond Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Ignorance can be cured, stupid is terminal. The only solution for stupid is natural selection, and that obviously hasn't worked out so well. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Lozier Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 It might just be me, but it seems an inspection would not have found the two major issues the plantiff had. Also, it got tossed for procedure, not for merit. Agreed...especially on water penetration in basement, don't know if an inspection would have shown much more than was already know: freshly painted, furniture in room, were there stains high on walls?, negative slope?.... If there is not active leak or excessive moisture at the time, or obvious high water marks or other : I note what I see (interior and exterior), tell them to check with owner and disclosure statement and monitor... if it is a foreclosed home I tell them there could be serious water penetration we just don't know... sounds like a HI could have been on the (meat) hook? what say you?? Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 I do not look forward to the day when I need to put my house on the market. My expertise will then become my liability. Marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msteger Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Yeah, I would agree that even if the buyers had an inspection done, if there were no signs of active water penetration (puddled, saturated or freshly stained boxed, etc.) at the time of the inspection, the inspector may have had no reason to report active water entry but only evidence of past water entry, monitor, and further question the sellers. We've all had this same situation and reported this way, hopefully without buyers like this suing everyone. Tort reform is needed and people filing these frivalous lawsuits need to re-imburse the defendants' costs if they lose the case. Our pre-inspection agreements are worth little not matter how strongly they are worded. Reporting what you see and careful wording in your report and a lot of CYA can help keep inspectors out of court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now