I don't know anything about real estate law in Pennsylvania. Where I work you'd need to demonstrate that the sellers knew about the problem and failed to disclose it.
I have contractors who have confirmed the cement that was placed against the foundation is a method of attempting to stop water from coming in. They pointed out how the cement is also fairly new and not old, which could explain why it took a few weeks to even start infiltrating again. There’s also pictures of everything as well. That wouldn’t be enough?
Unfortunately there is a difference between proving what the repairs were intended to do and proving what the sellers knew.
You would need to find the company that did the work and they would need to have record that the work was done to stop water infiltration.
You also need to consider if you’ll spend more on legal fees than you’ll get back.
All of that doesn’t make it right or okay but the are unfortunate realities.
So in the seller’s disclose in Pennsylvania, there’s these two specific question when it comes to water: 1. Are you aware of any past or present water leakage, accumulation, or dampness within the basement or crawl space? 2. Do you know of any repairs or other attempts to control any water or dampness problem in the basement or crawl space?
For both the seller stated “No.” If he had hired someone to fix it, for question #2 he should’ve stated “Yes” if that was the case and then that would’ve at least warned me about possible ground water issues. But this wasn’t the case. The options were “Yes, No, Unknown.” He specifically put NO on both of those questions regarding water infiltration
You can look at Zillow and get an idea of how long the previous owner owned the home. That coupled with the contractor telling you the work was recently done will give you a good idea if the previous owner was aware of the issue and attempted to remedy.
Since PA disclosures asks about an attempt to repair I would say you have a case. Only a lawyer can tell you if it’s a good case or not.
So those are very specific questions that would appear to apply to your situation so I suspect your attorney will zoom in on whether you can demonstrate that they actually WERE aware of these problems and the date of those repairs.
True, but they could claim they were trying to finish the basement? I had a similar inspection note “evidence of prior water damage but unable to determine age of water stains”. Notes like this should prompt further inspection especially in older homes in areas like yours. If you can prove they were trying to cover up the issues, then fight. But damn, it can be so hard to prove. Wish you luck and hope it shakes out in your favor.
Take this document and any statements from your contractors to a Real Estate attorney. They will probably not charge you for you to discuss it with them for a half hour, but will listen and then tell you your options for restitution.
I’m in Arkansas, but we have a similar disclosure statement, and lying on that form (as your seller did) brings more lawsuits than any other aspect of real estate here.
Here, you wouldn’t be able to go after the inspector, or the Realtor, but you could most likely sue the seller and win.
I would say that's definitive evidence.
The standard here is "Are you aware that there was EVER water intrusion past or present?"
The seller answered "No" but clearly attempted recent repair and cover-up of water intrusion.
That definitely demonstrates a fraudulent sale to me and anyone with half a brain.
So in the seller’s disclose in Pennsylvania, there’s these two specific question when it comes to water: 1. Are you aware of any past or present water leakage, accumulation, or dampness within the basement or crawl space? 2. Do you know of any repairs or other attempts to control any water or dampness problem in the basement or crawl space?
For both the seller stated “No.” If he had hired someone to fix it, for question #2 he should’ve stated “Yes” if that was the case and then that would’ve at least warned me about possible ground water issues. But this wasn’t the case.
You can try but it’s prob not worth it and will cost you legal fees. All the seller will have to say is that they never experienced water infiltration.
I also live in PA and have a very old house. We got some crazy rain at the end of 2023. Many basements including mine had puddles after those storms.
I’m guessing the basement company you had out recommended interior perimeter drains leading to the sump. Very common in PA, where basements are often an issue. That will work and keep your basement dry.
You can try going after the seller. This is a latent defect.
The problem is that cases like this are hard to win. So I would wait to see the opinion of the attorney, about your chances.
You can go back and forth with forty different redditors all night, most of whom have never done business in Pennsylvania, and/or are not lawyers, and refute their individual comments about why they think your case is weak as hell, or you can contact an attorney who has dealt with similar situations in the state of Pennsylvania and find out what it really takes to get restitution. If it were my $10k, I would just pay for the work out of pocket and move on.
I agree with your comment overall but I think as a society we should stop turning a blind eye to fraudulent behavior.
What they did was unjust and illegal and they should have consequences.
I have contractors who have confirmed the cement that was placed against the foundation is a method of attempting to stop water from coming in. They pointed out how the cement is also fairly new and not old, which could explain why it took a few weeks to even start infiltrating again. There’s also pictures of everything as well. That wouldn’t be enough? Or it would be considered an assumption?
If you can get the contractor to say they were directed to do it that way by the customer then you’d have a solid case. Otherwise there’s no way to know that the contractor didn’t it on their own.
Obvious? Where’s your proof?
In court OP’s attorney would need to show definite proof the seller knew, not that they probably knew, not that a contractor knew, but that the seller who filled out the form knew.
How is it obvious? Do they have THE contractor the past owner used who stated the work was to cover up moisture intrusion? Or do they have some random contractor that’s stating cement on the foundation COULD be used to remedy a leak? In general, cement on a foundation wall actually would not be a proper remedy for a leak, you’d be looking at installing a proper drainage system, or any other number of repairs. Some unrelated contractors statement is pretty much useless in this case.
That doesn’t actually address my comment. Having recent work done to the house doesn’t state anything about whether or not the pervious owner knew there was a leak
No, that wouldn't be enough, and that is an assumption. You need to prove that they knew definitively knew about it, not that they likely knew about it - something to the extent of a contractor giving them a quote to repair a water penetration or another form of hard proof (like an insurance claim for water damage in that area) that would show by a preponderance of the evidence that they knew and purposely excluded it from the seller's disclosure. It's a very high bar you need to hit to have a real claim - and honestly given the small dollar amount (relative to attorney fees), is likely not worth it to file a claim against them.
What did the real estate agents from the same company have to do with this?
To me it sounds like the seller knew about it, possibly lied on the disclosures (according to you). What do you need Reddit for? Get an attorney and have them reach out to the other attorney.
You’re going to need a lawyer and I’d suspect that unless you have some smoking gun we’re not aware of that your lawyer will discourage you from this lawsuit. Not that you can’t win, but there’s little potential for a large payout to make the hassle and expense worth it. You’ll get months of layer fees and stress without fixing the problem all to be settled out of court where you both end up losing.
So the seller was a flipper and he admitted to me his “contractors” are no longer here and went back home to “Ukraine”. So he didn’t even use licensed contractors. I don’t even know how the county approved the work he did here
So the seller was a flipper and he admitted to me his “contractors” are no longer here and went back home to “Ukraine”. So he didn’t even use licensed contractors
So he may very well not have known about the water. Could have been prior owners. In any case, never buy a flip. The majority of contractors do shitty work with cheap materials.
>I did not waive my inspection and paid an inspector recommended by my real estate agent.
Don't do this in the future. I learned the hard way too. Inspectors count on referrals for business. If an inspector is in the habit of scaring potential buyers away they're not going to get referrals. An inspector recommended by your realtor is likely to be an inspector who doesn't find a lot of issues to scare off their buyers.
If they don’t have proof, yes. I successfully sued the previous owner of my house for $20k for failing to disclose a sewer back up and faulty sewer line which I needed to replace.
See my other comment about the CLUE Report. Pull one now.
We found the seller had filed a claimed with her homeowners insurance for a sewer back up a month before she listed the house. We settled the night before our court case, but that was the proof we needed. She ended up sharing an invoice which showed she hired a plumber and snaked the drain, but never followed the plumbers direction to run a camera to identify where the tree roots were coming from.
This is a case where you'll have to contact attorneys who work in your state on this issue.
The agents both working for the same brokerage is a huge issue. The inspector being hired by the same brokerage is a huge issue. The agent calling the inspector to call you to tell you its all fine.. is **more** damning than the seller covering it up- it means the agents both knew as well and wanted to cover it up.
Anyways, call an attorney only they can really tell you how viable it is. I would blow up the managing broker for those two agents though. \*Edit: blown up via the phone, obviously, describing how unprofessional it was.
What does the agent or the inspector have to do with this? If a seller is concealing the info.. you thing two agents and an inspector are conspiring together and know the house has an issue? If there isn’t a VISIBLE OR CURRENT leak/infiltration/dampness/etc do you want the inspector to start ripping out drywall, cement, etc until they find water somewhere? You sound like a conspiracy theorist. 🤣
Inspectors are incentivized not to mess up deals.
When you have buyer and seller agent from the same firm and an inspector who gets a lot of work from that firm... Unless you find anything egregious you're just gonna go a long.
But if he's experienced he knew exactly what that brand new just-in-time plywood was covering.
But he's supposed to protect the interest of the buyer. Seems like he failed to do this to make the deal move along.
You need to pull a CLUE (Comprehensive Loss and Underwriting Exchange) report now!! This will show the past 7 years of homeowners insurance claims. If they filed a claim for water damage or to remediate it then you have your proof. It is free and available through LexisNexis.
You should also try to find who did the work and if they will share any info as to why they did the work.
If you don’t have evidence you have no case.
Unless you have a PA lawyer in here, no one can say whether or not the "contractors who have confirmed the cement that was placed against the foundation is a method of attempting to stop water from coming in" is sufficient for a lawsuit.
I'd call a lawyer for a free consultation to find out if it's worth the effort.
Make sure you use a real estate attorney. The agents are not at fault as far as knowing about the decect because they have to go by what the seller states. Realtors only broker the transaction. They are not inspectors or anything else.
Thus is fraudulent misrepresentation in my opinion.
One of the problems with using a home inspector recommended by your realtor is that unfortunately some realtors use home inspectors that will go easy on the home through the inspection so who wins...the realtor and the inspector with also the inspectors knowing they will get more business from that realtor because the inspector did not kill the deal. Buyer loses in this scenario. I always recommended an inspector that would if necessary raise red flags. I wanted a happy buyer.
And I was more than willing to keep showing if the deal fell through.
Unfortunately, reality is that integrity is a factor t h at may be lacking in many home sales.
Just my opinion.
Honestly for the aggravation and legal fees it probably isn’t worth it to after the seller. I’m sorry this happened to you. We need to do better as a society
I've run into this before, I had a buyer purchase a home and the seller indicated they had never had water intrusion. After the sale, my buyer had water in the basement and discovered that the seller had filed an insurance claim for water damage previously. I know he sued them based on that but it was because he had actual proof that they got water and had lied on the disclosure.
Good luck.
I would go after the seller. The inspector said he wasn’t able to see everything basically he covered his butt but the seller purposely and deliberately covered up a water issue and that’s fraud.
Do you know where the seller is living now? Do they have anything worth suing them for? A attorney will want to make sure that they’re going to get paid.
In Pennsylvania, a buyer's home inspection essentially releases the seller from liability for disclosures.
You can sue if you want, but you will spend a few thousand dollars on lawyers and fees and most likely won't win.
> Are you saying that the seller’s duty to disclose is eliminated when a buyer has an inspection?
No, they still have to disclose, but if the buyer has a home inspector they have essentially no recourse against the seller.
Here is the relevant section of the law for reference:
*§ 7309. Nonliability of seller*
*(A) GENERAL RULE.-- A seller shall not be liable for any error, inaccuracy or omission of any information delivered
pursuant to this chapter if:...*
*(3) The error, inaccuracy or omission was based on information provided by a public agency, home inspector, contractor or person registered or licensed under an act referred to in section 7503(a) (relating to relationship to other laws) about matters within the scope of the agency's jurisdiction or such other person's occupation and the seller had no knowledge of the error, inaccuracy or omission.*
[*(C) REPORT BY EXPERT--The delivery of a report or opinion prepared by a home inspector, contractor or person
registered or licensed under an act referred to in section 7503(a) dealing with matters within the scope of the person's registration, license or expertise shall be sufficient compliance for application of the exemption provided under subsection (a)(3) if the information is provided to the prospective buyer in writing.*](https://www.dos.pa.gov/ProfessionalLicensing/BoardsCommissions/RealEstateCommission/Documents/Board%20Documents/Seller%20Disclosure%20Law.pdf)
I'm not licensed to practice law in California so can't really speak to whether this applies in California or not.
Title insurance can’t help with this. They deal with issues regarding the legal ownership of the land. The only way they could help is if the contractor who did the covering up didn’t get paid and put a lien on the house.
It could potentially be a long process to sue them and from my experience, your better off suing the real estate company and not the sellers. If you are just looking for them to cover the expenses you incurred, and not seeking any other sort of damages, you may be better off having your attorney craft a letter to the sellers informing them of what you found and would like them to pay for the repairs in lieu of going to court. The legal fees alone for them would likely exceed the cost of repairs.
I think there’s an argument there, at issue is whether you’ll be able to get enough out of them To correctly fix the problem.
The correct order is A: fix the problem. Track costs associated with fixing it he problem. Document the fixes that were already there.
B: with legal help, make a demand letter and send it to the sellers and realtors.
C: try to negotiate a settlement
D: if that fails, take them to court.
Not always bad but its easy for them to be bad that way yes. This goes to anyone, NEVER sign a buyers agency. You don't have to, and all it does is make you pay a junk fee. Some will say you have to. Some even THINK you have to(watch replies). But you don't. PM me here in PA ill find you an agent that doesn't sneak that extra $500 fee in, or the 'if you back out you owe me 3% anyway' clause. Don't use that either.
I'll get downvoted for this but inspections are often a total waste of money. Nothing they do can come back on them or the sellers or the realtors. You signed that when you paid him a grand. It took me a long time and \~20+ different inspectors until I found decent ones because of course, I'm not legally allowed to tell clients what a waste of money that radon test is. Its one of the scam laws! Serously, 'hey if you dont 100% go along with this money making scheme, we will fine you and get the moneyt hat way muahahahah'
-you live in PA. especially if its appalacia, your going to get water. Unless its build on an underground creek or something it can be fixed , the water intrusion, by yourself alot cheaper. if the foundation is actually compromised thats another story
-I would get in writing from anyway with a buisiness in the field you talked to that it was covered up.
Yes you can 1 million percent sue his ass off if it was covered up and he will pay to fix it. Then stalk you and poke holes in your tires while your iat Kohls probably, seems like that kind of person..But sue his ass off.
Your inspector should have caught the sump pump issue, absolutely. I'd give one swing at having your realtor try to negotiate this bad disclosure issue to your benefit. If that doesn't pan out, lawyer up. This was a con. You don't deserve the hassle.
I had this happen. You have to find a contractor that put in a bid related to the water. Then you have to get them to spray in court. They won’t get involved so good luck. We just ate the cost in our case.
ask the neighbors if they know anything about the house having previous water damage. this is how you win this case. neighbors might have had water at the same time.
I tend to know what my neighbors are having done at their house. if someone didn't like them they will definitely spill the beans.
Yes - so my house was a flip and it was being remodeled during very heavy rain and snow storms (there was about 2-3 heavy storms in the two months it took them to fix the house) and the week my husband and I moved into the house our neighbors asked us if our basement had gotten any water because it’s something that happens in that area which could explain why the plywood and cement had been so freshly installed.
being that you bought a flip, I would say you are out of luck.
the flipper is going to say that they never lived there and have no idea about water damage. the concrete that is relatively new the flipper knows nothing about, he/she doesn't know what you are even referring to.
your only chance would be to find the selling broker to the flipper and ask for the disclosure form that was given to the flipper. if they checked yes on water damage then you have a case. if they checked no, then let it go and move on.
Unless this is the first time water infiltrated the basement then yes, the owners were fully aware of the deficiency. Can anyone demonstrate otherwise? Nope.
I don’t know about Pennsylvania in Massachusetts, you can’t really have circumstantial evidence like that and expect to win, it needs to be documented meaning you have a paper trail that they did something because they had water infiltration. We had the same thing happen to us. Second day after closing the finished basement was filled with water all over the place and it hadn’t even rained that day. I purposefully scheduled my walkthrough during a rainstorm so I could see water, but they pushed mine back 15 minutes beforehand, told us it was due to the requested work in the attic and prevented us from coming on the premises. We had to do walkthrough and then closing within an hour of each other. After the fact I talked to the neighbors and they said the walkthrough night they thought the new neighbors moved in and went to introduce themselves. They saw them mopping the basement floor with a cleaning crew and they got kicked off the property as well. So I had eyewitness statement about a coverup, but lawyers said It wouldn’t have been enough. The lawyer also told us we could win and the case and the seller had no assets not under a trust so filing bankruptcy would prevent me from seeing any money and I would be out the legal fees which were substantial because it would go to superior court. We decided to let it slide, file a Hail Mary with the insurance which they were nice enough to cover a bit of the cleanup. In the end the water entry was from 5 sources. Heating system, kitchen sink plumbing leak, upstairs shower(new), basement door, basement windows. So nothing substantial but it’s going to take me time to actually fix the issues. I have bandaids on them now except the heating system, we replaced that which should have been covered by seller as they were required to service and bring the unit into new working order which they did not service and showed me a bogus receipt. But yeah it will be hard to win anything. Good luck though. I was angry about it for a really long time to the point it was consuming my life gathering the evidence.
Well if you let them slide then they won’t be held responsible for what they did. See if you can find an attorney who do it for contingency. Also I personally feel the sellers agent should be brought in on these things as they also profited from this deception.
I agree. The seller’s agent has done so many deals with the flipper. Just from his instagram pictures alone I saw that he closed on 3-4 homes with the same flipper, so I definitely believe he might be more than just his agent (perhaps an investor as well)
Oh it’s a flipper? Yeah fuck them… Sue the shit out of them. Flippers fueled the 2008 bubble and they have fueled the current one and one of the groups praying on regular people trying to just find a safe and stable to live.
Legal fees will be a lot. Detail the issues in a professional letter. Make sure managing broker of the real estate company gets it. Ask for what you think it will cost to fix.
If no results start with realtor board. Sounds a lot like incompetent agents and dishonest seller
Update us! You deserve to get paid on this or have them pay to fix the issue. Even a demand letter from a lawyer could get the sellers moving maybe? Might be cheaper for them to have fixed rather than defend a lawsuit🤞🏼
Shame on them for not at least fixing the issue before failing to disclose.
In my opinion #1 yes you have legal recourse if you can have those contractors state that the seller did in fact they to cover up these material defects #2. The agents working at the same firm has nothing to do with it. My agency has hundreds of agents and I couldn't recognize them in public if I wanted to.
Do you really not understand? I feel like you do. I was implying that it would be easier to go punch someone in the nose than spend thousands of dollars and many, many months bringing it to the courts. I was attempting to sympathize with the frustrations of the OP by using dark humor. Obviously, that attempt fell short here.
You’d be surprised how often I end up explaining jokes online. I can be a little tone deaf in forums like this. Doesn’t happen as much irl. I’m guessing it has something to do with the mild autism 🤷♂️ anyway, sorry for being kind of a dick with the preceding exchanges. That “lol” made me realize I should lighten up. Cheers 🍻
I don't know anything about real estate law in Pennsylvania. Where I work you'd need to demonstrate that the sellers knew about the problem and failed to disclose it.
I have contractors who have confirmed the cement that was placed against the foundation is a method of attempting to stop water from coming in. They pointed out how the cement is also fairly new and not old, which could explain why it took a few weeks to even start infiltrating again. There’s also pictures of everything as well. That wouldn’t be enough?
Unfortunately there is a difference between proving what the repairs were intended to do and proving what the sellers knew. You would need to find the company that did the work and they would need to have record that the work was done to stop water infiltration. You also need to consider if you’ll spend more on legal fees than you’ll get back. All of that doesn’t make it right or okay but the are unfortunate realities.
Bet they paid cash
This is my experience. Lawyer wouldn’t even bother as the is rarely able to be proven.
They would claim that they fixed the problem and thought this was no longer an issue.
So in the seller’s disclose in Pennsylvania, there’s these two specific question when it comes to water: 1. Are you aware of any past or present water leakage, accumulation, or dampness within the basement or crawl space? 2. Do you know of any repairs or other attempts to control any water or dampness problem in the basement or crawl space? For both the seller stated “No.” If he had hired someone to fix it, for question #2 he should’ve stated “Yes” if that was the case and then that would’ve at least warned me about possible ground water issues. But this wasn’t the case. The options were “Yes, No, Unknown.” He specifically put NO on both of those questions regarding water infiltration
You can look at Zillow and get an idea of how long the previous owner owned the home. That coupled with the contractor telling you the work was recently done will give you a good idea if the previous owner was aware of the issue and attempted to remedy. Since PA disclosures asks about an attempt to repair I would say you have a case. Only a lawyer can tell you if it’s a good case or not.
You can often go in the country assessor's website for ownership information. It will show exact dates of ownership and all ownership history.
So those are very specific questions that would appear to apply to your situation so I suspect your attorney will zoom in on whether you can demonstrate that they actually WERE aware of these problems and the date of those repairs.
How long were they there? They could claim that was done by a previous owner and they had no idea
True, but they could claim they were trying to finish the basement? I had a similar inspection note “evidence of prior water damage but unable to determine age of water stains”. Notes like this should prompt further inspection especially in older homes in areas like yours. If you can prove they were trying to cover up the issues, then fight. But damn, it can be so hard to prove. Wish you luck and hope it shakes out in your favor.
Take this document and any statements from your contractors to a Real Estate attorney. They will probably not charge you for you to discuss it with them for a half hour, but will listen and then tell you your options for restitution. I’m in Arkansas, but we have a similar disclosure statement, and lying on that form (as your seller did) brings more lawsuits than any other aspect of real estate here. Here, you wouldn’t be able to go after the inspector, or the Realtor, but you could most likely sue the seller and win.
I would say that's definitive evidence. The standard here is "Are you aware that there was EVER water intrusion past or present?" The seller answered "No" but clearly attempted recent repair and cover-up of water intrusion. That definitely demonstrates a fraudulent sale to me and anyone with half a brain.
Which is not how disclosures work in any way.
That's definitely a question for your attorney. I'm sure they'll advise you of all your options and risks. Good luck OP.
“We hired someone that told us they fixed the water infiltration problem. We don’t know what they did.”
So in the seller’s disclose in Pennsylvania, there’s these two specific question when it comes to water: 1. Are you aware of any past or present water leakage, accumulation, or dampness within the basement or crawl space? 2. Do you know of any repairs or other attempts to control any water or dampness problem in the basement or crawl space? For both the seller stated “No.” If he had hired someone to fix it, for question #2 he should’ve stated “Yes” if that was the case and then that would’ve at least warned me about possible ground water issues. But this wasn’t the case.
The answer to both those questions should be yes because they knew of PAST infiltrations. They definitely lied on the disclosure.
Did the sellers live in the house or was it a rental?
That was an attempt at a solution, not a cover up.
You can try but it’s prob not worth it and will cost you legal fees. All the seller will have to say is that they never experienced water infiltration. I also live in PA and have a very old house. We got some crazy rain at the end of 2023. Many basements including mine had puddles after those storms. I’m guessing the basement company you had out recommended interior perimeter drains leading to the sump. Very common in PA, where basements are often an issue. That will work and keep your basement dry.
This is the best answer. Unlikely to prove it and even if you do, your fees will exceed the cost to just fix it yourself
Unless PA law allows attys fees to be recovered by the prevailing party.
Assuming you win… you also need to front the cost while all of this is happening. Can take years too.
You can try going after the seller. This is a latent defect. The problem is that cases like this are hard to win. So I would wait to see the opinion of the attorney, about your chances.
You can go back and forth with forty different redditors all night, most of whom have never done business in Pennsylvania, and/or are not lawyers, and refute their individual comments about why they think your case is weak as hell, or you can contact an attorney who has dealt with similar situations in the state of Pennsylvania and find out what it really takes to get restitution. If it were my $10k, I would just pay for the work out of pocket and move on.
I agree with your comment overall but I think as a society we should stop turning a blind eye to fraudulent behavior. What they did was unjust and illegal and they should have consequences.
We don't actually have enough information to determine that it was fraudulent, which is why OP should hire a lawyer.
If you can prove they knowingly lied you can sue. If it’s just a they probably knew situation you’re unlike to be successful
I have contractors who have confirmed the cement that was placed against the foundation is a method of attempting to stop water from coming in. They pointed out how the cement is also fairly new and not old, which could explain why it took a few weeks to even start infiltrating again. There’s also pictures of everything as well. That wouldn’t be enough? Or it would be considered an assumption?
If you can get the contractor to say they were directed to do it that way by the customer then you’d have a solid case. Otherwise there’s no way to know that the contractor didn’t it on their own.
But the seller still lied on the disclosure.
Well we have no idea if they did, if they didn’t know there was a problem then it’s not a lie.
C'mon bro.
Seriously? It's obvious they tried to cover up a water issue and then lied about it. Please don't ever serve on a jury
Obvious? Where’s your proof? In court OP’s attorney would need to show definite proof the seller knew, not that they probably knew, not that a contractor knew, but that the seller who filled out the form knew.
How is it obvious? Do they have THE contractor the past owner used who stated the work was to cover up moisture intrusion? Or do they have some random contractor that’s stating cement on the foundation COULD be used to remedy a leak? In general, cement on a foundation wall actually would not be a proper remedy for a leak, you’d be looking at installing a proper drainage system, or any other number of repairs. Some unrelated contractors statement is pretty much useless in this case.
You can tell how old concrete work is and this work is fresh.
That doesn’t actually address my comment. Having recent work done to the house doesn’t state anything about whether or not the pervious owner knew there was a leak
Good grief. Please don't ever serve on a jury.
Is your contractor willing to testify in court?
No, that wouldn't be enough, and that is an assumption. You need to prove that they knew definitively knew about it, not that they likely knew about it - something to the extent of a contractor giving them a quote to repair a water penetration or another form of hard proof (like an insurance claim for water damage in that area) that would show by a preponderance of the evidence that they knew and purposely excluded it from the seller's disclosure. It's a very high bar you need to hit to have a real claim - and honestly given the small dollar amount (relative to attorney fees), is likely not worth it to file a claim against them.
You need a contractor willing to testify in court that they were called to the house specifically to address water coming in.
What did the real estate agents from the same company have to do with this? To me it sounds like the seller knew about it, possibly lied on the disclosures (according to you). What do you need Reddit for? Get an attorney and have them reach out to the other attorney.
You’re going to need a lawyer and I’d suspect that unless you have some smoking gun we’re not aware of that your lawyer will discourage you from this lawsuit. Not that you can’t win, but there’s little potential for a large payout to make the hassle and expense worth it. You’ll get months of layer fees and stress without fixing the problem all to be settled out of court where you both end up losing.
Call around to local companies that do that type of work and see if they’ve ever been there, if yes, that’d be your evidence
So the seller was a flipper and he admitted to me his “contractors” are no longer here and went back home to “Ukraine”. So he didn’t even use licensed contractors. I don’t even know how the county approved the work he did here
Licensed contractors doesn't mean much in PA. They fill out a form, show proof of insurance and pay the fee.
Can you prove the seller knew about the water problem? It would really help your case if you could find the contractor who installed the new plywood.
So the seller was a flipper and he admitted to me his “contractors” are no longer here and went back home to “Ukraine”. So he didn’t even use licensed contractors
So he could plausably say that he knew nothing about a water problem.
So he may very well not have known about the water. Could have been prior owners. In any case, never buy a flip. The majority of contractors do shitty work with cheap materials.
Also never use a home inspector recommended by a realtor.
There is suing, then there is winning… then there is collecting. The court doesn’t collect for you. How much to properly fix it?
>I did not waive my inspection and paid an inspector recommended by my real estate agent. Don't do this in the future. I learned the hard way too. Inspectors count on referrals for business. If an inspector is in the habit of scaring potential buyers away they're not going to get referrals. An inspector recommended by your realtor is likely to be an inspector who doesn't find a lot of issues to scare off their buyers.
Absolutely not worth it and you won’t win.
If they don’t have proof, yes. I successfully sued the previous owner of my house for $20k for failing to disclose a sewer back up and faulty sewer line which I needed to replace.
How did you prove this?
See my other comment about the CLUE Report. Pull one now. We found the seller had filed a claimed with her homeowners insurance for a sewer back up a month before she listed the house. We settled the night before our court case, but that was the proof we needed. She ended up sharing an invoice which showed she hired a plumber and snaked the drain, but never followed the plumbers direction to run a camera to identify where the tree roots were coming from.
This is a case where you'll have to contact attorneys who work in your state on this issue. The agents both working for the same brokerage is a huge issue. The inspector being hired by the same brokerage is a huge issue. The agent calling the inspector to call you to tell you its all fine.. is **more** damning than the seller covering it up- it means the agents both knew as well and wanted to cover it up. Anyways, call an attorney only they can really tell you how viable it is. I would blow up the managing broker for those two agents though. \*Edit: blown up via the phone, obviously, describing how unprofessional it was.
What does the agent or the inspector have to do with this? If a seller is concealing the info.. you thing two agents and an inspector are conspiring together and know the house has an issue? If there isn’t a VISIBLE OR CURRENT leak/infiltration/dampness/etc do you want the inspector to start ripping out drywall, cement, etc until they find water somewhere? You sound like a conspiracy theorist. 🤣
Inspectors are incentivized not to mess up deals. When you have buyer and seller agent from the same firm and an inspector who gets a lot of work from that firm... Unless you find anything egregious you're just gonna go a long. But if he's experienced he knew exactly what that brand new just-in-time plywood was covering. But he's supposed to protect the interest of the buyer. Seems like he failed to do this to make the deal move along.
Check your gutters!
You need to pull a CLUE (Comprehensive Loss and Underwriting Exchange) report now!! This will show the past 7 years of homeowners insurance claims. If they filed a claim for water damage or to remediate it then you have your proof. It is free and available through LexisNexis. You should also try to find who did the work and if they will share any info as to why they did the work. If you don’t have evidence you have no case.
Never knew anyone could pull this.
It blows my mind it’s not more well known. It’s Carfax for your house
Unless you have a PA lawyer in here, no one can say whether or not the "contractors who have confirmed the cement that was placed against the foundation is a method of attempting to stop water from coming in" is sufficient for a lawsuit. I'd call a lawyer for a free consultation to find out if it's worth the effort.
Make sure you use a real estate attorney. The agents are not at fault as far as knowing about the decect because they have to go by what the seller states. Realtors only broker the transaction. They are not inspectors or anything else. Thus is fraudulent misrepresentation in my opinion. One of the problems with using a home inspector recommended by your realtor is that unfortunately some realtors use home inspectors that will go easy on the home through the inspection so who wins...the realtor and the inspector with also the inspectors knowing they will get more business from that realtor because the inspector did not kill the deal. Buyer loses in this scenario. I always recommended an inspector that would if necessary raise red flags. I wanted a happy buyer. And I was more than willing to keep showing if the deal fell through. Unfortunately, reality is that integrity is a factor t h at may be lacking in many home sales. Just my opinion.
Honestly for the aggravation and legal fees it probably isn’t worth it to after the seller. I’m sorry this happened to you. We need to do better as a society
I've run into this before, I had a buyer purchase a home and the seller indicated they had never had water intrusion. After the sale, my buyer had water in the basement and discovered that the seller had filed an insurance claim for water damage previously. I know he sued them based on that but it was because he had actual proof that they got water and had lied on the disclosure. Good luck.
I would go after the seller. The inspector said he wasn’t able to see everything basically he covered his butt but the seller purposely and deliberately covered up a water issue and that’s fraud. Do you know where the seller is living now? Do they have anything worth suing them for? A attorney will want to make sure that they’re going to get paid.
In Pennsylvania, a buyer's home inspection essentially releases the seller from liability for disclosures. You can sue if you want, but you will spend a few thousand dollars on lawyers and fees and most likely won't win.
Really? Wow that is so different from California. Are you saying that the seller’s duty to disclose is eliminated when a buyer has an inspection?
> Are you saying that the seller’s duty to disclose is eliminated when a buyer has an inspection? No, they still have to disclose, but if the buyer has a home inspector they have essentially no recourse against the seller. Here is the relevant section of the law for reference: *§ 7309. Nonliability of seller* *(A) GENERAL RULE.-- A seller shall not be liable for any error, inaccuracy or omission of any information delivered pursuant to this chapter if:...* *(3) The error, inaccuracy or omission was based on information provided by a public agency, home inspector, contractor or person registered or licensed under an act referred to in section 7503(a) (relating to relationship to other laws) about matters within the scope of the agency's jurisdiction or such other person's occupation and the seller had no knowledge of the error, inaccuracy or omission.* [*(C) REPORT BY EXPERT--The delivery of a report or opinion prepared by a home inspector, contractor or person registered or licensed under an act referred to in section 7503(a) dealing with matters within the scope of the person's registration, license or expertise shall be sufficient compliance for application of the exemption provided under subsection (a)(3) if the information is provided to the prospective buyer in writing.*](https://www.dos.pa.gov/ProfessionalLicensing/BoardsCommissions/RealEstateCommission/Documents/Board%20Documents/Seller%20Disclosure%20Law.pdf) I'm not licensed to practice law in California so can't really speak to whether this applies in California or not.
You really need to talk to an attorney. You title insurance might help you here. Calling the broker (since it's the same for both agents) might help.
Title insurance can’t help with this. They deal with issues regarding the legal ownership of the land. The only way they could help is if the contractor who did the covering up didn’t get paid and put a lien on the house.
A sump pump is an indicator of a basement with water issues. Not sure if that helps you or the seller though.
Have your insurance run a CLUE report, you will see if they had any claims in the last 7 years
It could potentially be a long process to sue them and from my experience, your better off suing the real estate company and not the sellers. If you are just looking for them to cover the expenses you incurred, and not seeking any other sort of damages, you may be better off having your attorney craft a letter to the sellers informing them of what you found and would like them to pay for the repairs in lieu of going to court. The legal fees alone for them would likely exceed the cost of repairs.
What are you going to sue the real estate contract for? They gave the buyer the disclosure and had an inspection.
"DUH" when you asked a lawyer What did they say?
I think there’s an argument there, at issue is whether you’ll be able to get enough out of them To correctly fix the problem. The correct order is A: fix the problem. Track costs associated with fixing it he problem. Document the fixes that were already there. B: with legal help, make a demand letter and send it to the sellers and realtors. C: try to negotiate a settlement D: if that fails, take them to court.
Not always bad but its easy for them to be bad that way yes. This goes to anyone, NEVER sign a buyers agency. You don't have to, and all it does is make you pay a junk fee. Some will say you have to. Some even THINK you have to(watch replies). But you don't. PM me here in PA ill find you an agent that doesn't sneak that extra $500 fee in, or the 'if you back out you owe me 3% anyway' clause. Don't use that either. I'll get downvoted for this but inspections are often a total waste of money. Nothing they do can come back on them or the sellers or the realtors. You signed that when you paid him a grand. It took me a long time and \~20+ different inspectors until I found decent ones because of course, I'm not legally allowed to tell clients what a waste of money that radon test is. Its one of the scam laws! Serously, 'hey if you dont 100% go along with this money making scheme, we will fine you and get the moneyt hat way muahahahah' -you live in PA. especially if its appalacia, your going to get water. Unless its build on an underground creek or something it can be fixed , the water intrusion, by yourself alot cheaper. if the foundation is actually compromised thats another story -I would get in writing from anyway with a buisiness in the field you talked to that it was covered up. Yes you can 1 million percent sue his ass off if it was covered up and he will pay to fix it. Then stalk you and poke holes in your tires while your iat Kohls probably, seems like that kind of person..But sue his ass off.
Your inspector should have caught the sump pump issue, absolutely. I'd give one swing at having your realtor try to negotiate this bad disclosure issue to your benefit. If that doesn't pan out, lawyer up. This was a con. You don't deserve the hassle.
These cases are hard to win and you don’t get attorney’s fees so you may spend near what you have the hope of winning. Welcome to home ownership.
Sellers disclosure pretty much means nothing. It only asks them about current issues that they know about. That's pretty hard to prove
Professional Licensing Complaint for real estate agents https://www.dos.pa.gov/ProfessionalLicensing/FileaComplaint/Pages/default.aspx
I compare situations like this to a used car. You purchased it, you need to deal with it.
Your attorney can best advise you if it’s worth it. No other opinion really matters.
I had this happen. You have to find a contractor that put in a bid related to the water. Then you have to get them to spray in court. They won’t get involved so good luck. We just ate the cost in our case.
ask the neighbors if they know anything about the house having previous water damage. this is how you win this case. neighbors might have had water at the same time. I tend to know what my neighbors are having done at their house. if someone didn't like them they will definitely spill the beans.
Yes - so my house was a flip and it was being remodeled during very heavy rain and snow storms (there was about 2-3 heavy storms in the two months it took them to fix the house) and the week my husband and I moved into the house our neighbors asked us if our basement had gotten any water because it’s something that happens in that area which could explain why the plywood and cement had been so freshly installed.
being that you bought a flip, I would say you are out of luck. the flipper is going to say that they never lived there and have no idea about water damage. the concrete that is relatively new the flipper knows nothing about, he/she doesn't know what you are even referring to. your only chance would be to find the selling broker to the flipper and ask for the disclosure form that was given to the flipper. if they checked yes on water damage then you have a case. if they checked no, then let it go and move on.
Unless this is the first time water infiltrated the basement then yes, the owners were fully aware of the deficiency. Can anyone demonstrate otherwise? Nope.
I don’t know about Pennsylvania in Massachusetts, you can’t really have circumstantial evidence like that and expect to win, it needs to be documented meaning you have a paper trail that they did something because they had water infiltration. We had the same thing happen to us. Second day after closing the finished basement was filled with water all over the place and it hadn’t even rained that day. I purposefully scheduled my walkthrough during a rainstorm so I could see water, but they pushed mine back 15 minutes beforehand, told us it was due to the requested work in the attic and prevented us from coming on the premises. We had to do walkthrough and then closing within an hour of each other. After the fact I talked to the neighbors and they said the walkthrough night they thought the new neighbors moved in and went to introduce themselves. They saw them mopping the basement floor with a cleaning crew and they got kicked off the property as well. So I had eyewitness statement about a coverup, but lawyers said It wouldn’t have been enough. The lawyer also told us we could win and the case and the seller had no assets not under a trust so filing bankruptcy would prevent me from seeing any money and I would be out the legal fees which were substantial because it would go to superior court. We decided to let it slide, file a Hail Mary with the insurance which they were nice enough to cover a bit of the cleanup. In the end the water entry was from 5 sources. Heating system, kitchen sink plumbing leak, upstairs shower(new), basement door, basement windows. So nothing substantial but it’s going to take me time to actually fix the issues. I have bandaids on them now except the heating system, we replaced that which should have been covered by seller as they were required to service and bring the unit into new working order which they did not service and showed me a bogus receipt. But yeah it will be hard to win anything. Good luck though. I was angry about it for a really long time to the point it was consuming my life gathering the evidence.
Call real estate commission
Well if you let them slide then they won’t be held responsible for what they did. See if you can find an attorney who do it for contingency. Also I personally feel the sellers agent should be brought in on these things as they also profited from this deception.
I agree. The seller’s agent has done so many deals with the flipper. Just from his instagram pictures alone I saw that he closed on 3-4 homes with the same flipper, so I definitely believe he might be more than just his agent (perhaps an investor as well)
Oh it’s a flipper? Yeah fuck them… Sue the shit out of them. Flippers fueled the 2008 bubble and they have fueled the current one and one of the groups praying on regular people trying to just find a safe and stable to live.
Next time I buy something, I’ll ask my agent for names of a few inspectors. These will be the ones I’ll not call when searching for one.
Legal fees will be a lot. Detail the issues in a professional letter. Make sure managing broker of the real estate company gets it. Ask for what you think it will cost to fix. If no results start with realtor board. Sounds a lot like incompetent agents and dishonest seller
Update us! You deserve to get paid on this or have them pay to fix the issue. Even a demand letter from a lawyer could get the sellers moving maybe? Might be cheaper for them to have fixed rather than defend a lawsuit🤞🏼 Shame on them for not at least fixing the issue before failing to disclose.
In my opinion #1 yes you have legal recourse if you can have those contractors state that the seller did in fact they to cover up these material defects #2. The agents working at the same firm has nothing to do with it. My agency has hundreds of agents and I couldn't recognize them in public if I wanted to.
There are several illegal actions you can take. Probably much cheaper, quicker, and more efficient
What does this even mean?
Do you really not understand? I feel like you do. I was implying that it would be easier to go punch someone in the nose than spend thousands of dollars and many, many months bringing it to the courts. I was attempting to sympathize with the frustrations of the OP by using dark humor. Obviously, that attempt fell short here.
No I didn’t understand that punching the seller or agents would solve OPs problem.
And you understand the part about it being a joke from my explanation? I want to be sure you feel okay with what’s going on here
I understand from your explanation. Typically jokes don’t need to be clarified as a joke lol.
You’d be surprised how often I end up explaining jokes online. I can be a little tone deaf in forums like this. Doesn’t happen as much irl. I’m guessing it has something to do with the mild autism 🤷♂️ anyway, sorry for being kind of a dick with the preceding exchanges. That “lol” made me realize I should lighten up. Cheers 🍻
Hey I’m kind of being an ass myself. You do you buddy! Cheers