Get buyer to fix it or walk away- No need to accept a major defect
such as that in todays market. I would get county inspectors as well
as a couple of independents to evaluate the septic and go from there.
But I would NEVER buy that house without properly working septic.



On May 1, 3:35 pm, dpb wrote:
On May 1, 1:58 pm, jtpr wrote:

We have an offer pending inspection on the table for our house.
Unfortunately it seems the inspector deemed our septic "poor". So, I
called the people that have been pumping it the past 20 years and they
came over and looked at it. They said it was "holding water" and
that, in fact, it was near failure. They said they need to test the
area to be sure a new leech field could be put in the same location,
and if it could it would run 5-7k for the work. This is a 3 bedroom
home in NH.

All of this seems reasonable. Other then getting a couple more quotes
on this does anybody else have any insight? Questions I should ask?

Who's inspector--buyer's I presume? If so, unless you're willing to
just "eat" $5k, I'd get another opinion--probably starting w/ the
county or whatever municipality is the controlling health inspection/
certification/approval body.

KC has a useful question although a well operating septic field
doesn't rely on the surface ground so much so that rainwater (unless
it's standing) shouldn't cause failure.

Lastly, if it is finally determined need new field, I'd at least try
to get the buyer to pick up a part of the tab -- after all, a brand
new leach field isn't what one would expect to get in a 20+ yr-old
house.