On Friday, September 27, 2013 8:56:10 AM UTC-4, Alex Gunderson wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 05:01:02 -0700, bob haller wrote:



http://www.ncagr.gov/standard/LP/LPg....htm#Delivery5



This section was particularly useful:

"If the buyer makes it clear that they have made the effort to confirm

the status of fixtures, and if the propane tank and its contents were

not excluded, then they may have a legitimate claim of ownership should

the question come up."



I wonder if my "as is" discloser is enough on due diligence?


The key question here is a claim against who? They are talking
about the seller not stating who owns the tank, disclosing that it
is not theirs, etc at the time of sale. In that case, what they
are saying is that you may have a claim against the SELLER. It kind
of makes sense. The tank was attached, and usually that which is
attached is included in the sale. On the other side, the argument
would be that it's common for tanks to be rented, not owned, and
you the buyer assumed it was owned, etc. This probably has come
up before and there would be court history on it. The other part
is that even if you have a claim, it's can you collect? Do you
even know where the seller is now?