I stand corrected, my assumption was based only on the standard disclosure
form for my home purchase, which I guess is different depending on state
law. It seems like such a sensible thing I assumed it was probably a
standard in the US. In my case, the boilerplate was to the effect that the
seller attests that any known problems of any consequence have been
disclosed.

"Jonathan Kamens" wrote in message
...
"Jamie" writes:
If you can PROVE that the previous owner was aware of the problem you
almost
certainly have a case. It is illegal to fail to disclose any structural
problems

That's hardly universally true.

Many states require sellers to answer truthfully when *asked*
but does not require them to disclose information for which
they are not asked.

Alabama, where the house we're discussing is located, falls
into this category.

Massachusetts, for example, requires sellers to answer
honestly but does not require a formal disclosure. On the
other hand, it does require real estate agents to disclose any
information they know which may impact a buyer's decision to
purchase a property. Some Massashuetts agents address this
requirement by asking all sellers to fill out a detailed
questionnaire; others go to the opposite extreme and
explicitly tell sellers not to give them any information they
wouldn't want to give to a buyer, because once the agent has
been given the information they have to disclose it.