View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
jstp
 
Posts: n/a
Default Home inspection dilemma - missing gutters

"user" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 May 2004 14:26:54 -0500, Matt

wrote:
"Dave Solly" wrote in message
...
(Jon) wrote in news:3252df67.0405091046.3011dc44
@posting.google.com:

Hi,

I'm wondering if anyone has any experience negotiating gutter
repairs/replacement in the purchase of a home. Here's my situation:

I am a first time homebuyer and recently I had the home inspected,
where--among other things--the inspector noted that rain gutters were
missing from the front of the house (curiously there are gutters in
the back). It was visually apparent from the discoloration of the
concrete foundation due to splashing, that the lack of gutters (and
poor yard grading) was causing rain water from the roof to puddle and
become trapped next to the house, which was causing minor water
seepage into the basement.

Based on the inspection results, I asked to the seller to perform a
number of tasks, including re-installing the gutters in front. The
seller has since responded and refuses to install the gutters,

stating
simply that there weren't any front gutters when she purchased the
home 7 yrs ago. While that may be true, I feel that gutters are to

be
considered a home necessity, rather than an optional item, so I still
feel that I am being reasonable in asking that they be installed.

Moreover, my point is this:

IF the house had come equipped with front gutters, but the inspector
found them to be in terrible shape or nonfunctional, I would have
obviously asked for them be replaced. To address this problem, I'm
assuming the seller cannot simply opt to take them down and leave the
house 'gutterless'. If this WERE to happen, I would have grounds to
exercise my Inspection Contingency Clause and walk away from the deal
with my deposit back, correct (or no)?

So to me, a house with non-working gutters is the same as a house

with
no gutters, although legally I am wondering they are one in the same.

My concern is that if neither side were to budge, and I tried to walk
away from the deal on the basis of the missing gutters, that this may
not be sufficient grounds to reclaim my deposit. Does anyone know

the
answer to this?

Should I hold firm in asking for new gutters, or is this wishful
thinking?

Any thoughts/advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Jon


I'm no expert but I'd hold firm on having the gutters added or ask for

some
type of price reduction to be able to add them yourself mainly due to

the
water seeping into the basement. Just depends on how badly you want the
house and all that comes with it. Ultimately if you buy the house the
problem of seepage into the basement becomes your problem because your

home
inspector pointed it out and reported it to you. If you do buy the

house
and don't fix the problem then you could run into the same situation but

be
on the other end of it when you go to sell it. Again I am no expert but
water seeping into the basement would be enough for me to walk away from

the
deal if she didn't at least give you a price reduction.

If you do buy the house I'd also be sure to regrade that area to slope

away
from the house.


Personally, I'm still trying to figure out why anyone considers the
cost of the gutters - which will be absolutely trivial compared to the
cost of just about any house - to be an issue.

What is it with first-time buyers, that they think it's reasonable
to considering breaking a deal for something that is going to cost
a couple of hundred bucks, at most? Cripes, don't they have ANY
sense of proportion?



I agree with this. If you want the house, just buy it and install the
gutters. If you don't want it, pretext the water infiltration as the deal
breaker, not the absence of gutters, and walk away.