House bought that was not what it should have been

[Johny Utah]

I know someone that bought a house recently. The house was inspected. They moved in and there is mold in the crawl spaces and ants everywhere.

There was a room addition to the original house build. Found out there are no permits for it. It’s not on a slab and the roof is not connected to the house correct. It has a patch on the roof also. Because of this the rain water is not going where it needs to go. They had a contractor check out the room. They said it needs torn down from mold a rotten wood.

 

Who is responsible for this? The inspector? What can be done?

[greg1647545532]

Did they get a warranty?

[Johny Utah]

Yes, They said the warranty only covers the air conditioning and fridge ect.

[Mace1647545504]

I would think they could go back on the inspector..plus they should be able to go back on the previous owner as they had previous knowledge

[STEVE-O]

Good luck, doubtful in the final text they can go back on the seller at all.

 

Sadly also the inspector probably has a clause stating that the only reimbursement they would be able to receive is what his inspection fee was.

[Johny Utah]

How can no one be responsible for this? Isn’t that what the house inspector is for? Is to find out if there are problems with the house before someone buys it. They are really getting screwed with the expensive problems this house has.

[iwashmycar]

Seems like the pre-purchase inspection would have caught that. I assume they had paid some sort of independent inspection?

[Johny Utah]

Yes they had it inspected by a inspector before they bought it.

[BStowers023]

Might be able to file a claim. Not sure what can be done legally. Being in the construction industry myself, I know I don’t trust anyone without a good amount of credentials and backing by people I know. Seems like a shitty situation. I’d tell your friend to talk to a lawyer before anything at this point. The sooner the better

[STEVE-O]

Yes agreed it sucks.

 

Think of it like this. You want to buy a car so you take it into a place for a third party inspection. You then decided to buy the car and found out after it has issues. You don’t really have any major recourse of actions except for maybe getting your initial inspection money back.

 

Now if the seller did things to hide issues there is a possibility depending on their contract they could go back on the seller but doubtful

[Geeesammy]

Knew someone who ran into this, he was up shit creek. Inspectors cover their ass and basically are held harmless.

[Johny Utah]

This is a bad system then. No one is held liable for not doing their job correctly. It’s pretty unbelievable you have no protection as a home buyer.

[Stallion Motorsports1647545491]

At last check you don't even have to have a license to be a "Home Inspector" in Ohio. Literally you could have zero working knowledge on anything to do with properties, and be an inspector.

 

Tom

[cdk 4219]

I believe in Ohio that Whatever the inspector charged for the inspection is his liability cap. If he or she charged $600 and later faults that would cost thousands to remedy are found, he can be sued for his original fee and not liable monetarily for more.

[cdk 4219]

This is a bad system then. No one is held liable for not doing their job correctly. It’s pretty unbelievable you have no protection as a home buyer.

Same as government / union work

[Tractor]

There is a recourse but works better if you can prove the seller knew about it. Never done it myself but have had this conversation with Realtors.

[Johny Utah]

It was supposedly a house someone flipped. They don’t think they ever lived in it.

[Geeto67]

Let me preface this by saying that I don't know what ohio's laws are concerning disclosures and general house purchase contracts.

 

That being said, if I were the home buyer, I would look at the purchase agreement for the house and the disclosures very carefully to see if these issues were disclosed in a sneaky way. most states require you to disclose wood destroying insects and toxic mold, so if it's in there then it's kind of their fault for not reading the disclosures.

 

If they don't see it anywhere, then take the documents to a real estate lawyer who practices litigation. I don't see the seller going....oops my bad, but if they said the house is habitable, and the house really isn't habitable at all then there is an implied warranty of habitability (in other words, you can't lie about the house being safe to live in if it isn't). A real estate lawyer who practices real estate litigation can tell them if they have a course of action against the seller. but it is all going to depend on what's in the sale documents.

[Mensan]

Geeto is right, disclosures must be signed for any water issues. They can claim they didn't know, but if the damage is significant, that would be hard to argue (though not impossible).

[LJ]

It was supposedly a house someone flipped. They don’t think they ever lived in it.

 

Ohio has no exemption for flippers. If they opened walls for the flip, they definitely knew.

[Zx2guy19]

Lots of good information in here, lots of wrong information.

 

1) Inspectors are not liable. Plain and simple- you don't even need to be licensed in Ohio to inspect (until this year...they must be licensed by end of 2019 now).

 

2) If the damage is what's called "latant", it means it's unreasonable for anyone, including the homeowner, to know about the problem. This means an inspector, the buyer or seller, agents, etc., had no idea. You're fucked if that's the case.

 

3) If the damage is so noticeable that everyone in their right mind should have caught it, it's called a "patent" defect, and must be disclosed on the RPD (Residential Property Disclosure). If they didn't, that could be a violation of not only the seller, but also the agent. You may have a case if this is what happened. However, the argument will be made that the buyer walked the property and signed off on their final inspection, so if it was patent, how did they not see it?

 

Personally, I think this person is fucked. It's more of an ethics thing vs. legal...as a flipper, I fix things the right way, 100%, no exceptions. It has cost me tens of thousands of dollars to do that over time, but I never want to be known as someone who doesn't do things the right way. I know of some REALLY shady flipping going on. Like, dangerous stuff. I've reported it but most of the time BZS and such don't care.

 

Example: I know of a house where it was leaning over more than 6" to the left. Instead of fixing the foundation, the flipper built an entirely new exterior wall and new "foundation" to cover it up. It appears level on the outside, but behind the faux wall, it's the leaning tower of Olde Towne East.

[LJ]

Lots of good information in here, lots of wrong information.

 

1) Inspectors are not liable. Plain and simple- you don't even need to be licensed in Ohio to inspect (until this year...they must be licensed by end of 2019 now).

 

2) If the damage is what's called "latant", it means it's unreasonable for anyone, including the homeowner, to know about the problem. This means an inspector, the buyer or seller, agents, etc., had no idea. You're fucked if that's the case.

 

3) If the damage is so noticeable that everyone in their right mind should have caught it, it's called a "patent" defect, and must be disclosed on the RPD (Residential Property Disclosure). If they didn't, that could be a violation of not only the seller, but also the agent. You may have a case if this is what happened. However, the argument will be made that the buyer walked the property and signed off on their final inspection, so if it was patent, how did they not see it?

 

Personally, I think this person is fucked. It's more of an ethics thing vs. legal...as a flipper, I fix things the right way, 100%, no exceptions. It has cost me tens of thousands of dollars to do that over time, but I never want to be known as someone who doesn't do things the right way. I know of some REALLY shady flipping going on. Like, dangerous stuff. I've reported it but most of the time BZS and such don't care.

 

Example: I know of a house where it was leaning over more than 6" to the left. Instead of fixing the foundation, the flipper built an entirely new exterior wall and new "foundation" to cover it up. It appears level on the outside, but behind the faux wall, it's the leaning tower of Olde Towne East.

 

Have you ever read the cited Ohio case law for these situations? It's actually really interesting. Ohio actually has no law for the seller filling out a disclosure in bad faith, it has to be proven that they were attempting to defraud the buyer, which is what makes the case law so damn interesting

[zeitgeist57]

This thread is eye-opening.

[Zx2guy19]

Have you ever read the cited Ohio case law for these situations? It's actually really interesting. Ohio actually has no law for the seller filling out a disclosure in bad faith, it has to be proven that they were attempting to defraud the buyer, which is what makes the case law so damn interesting

 

I've not specifically read it, no. However, case law sometimes supersedes and creates precedence for these kinds of rulings. There are documented cases (I'm not going to go find them because I don't care that much) where people have had to repay for repairs because of fraudulently filling out the RPD.

[spankis]

I've not specifically read it, no. However, case law sometimes supersedes and creates precedence for these kinds of rulings. There are documented cases (I'm not going to go find them because I don't care that much) where people have had to repay for repairs because of fraudulently filling out the RPD.

 

I had a relative sell a house and basically report "nope never had water in the basement" on the disclosure, when they had in fact had it flood several times.

 

Within a year or two of selling it, the basement flooded for the new owner. After some time in court, said relative did end up paying for the cleanup and the bulk of the repairs. So it does happen, but reading here this case likely falls under the "patent" defect category.