We live in the greater Boston area and recently made an offer on a
house which was accepted. The house is a one-story ranch with a
basement and is 48 years old. Today we had a home-inspection where
vertical cracks running on both the front and rear foundation were
discovered at approximately the same offset from the edge of the
house. We first saw the house during an open-house and asked the
seller's agent many times if there were any disclosures on the house
to which she replied that it was an estate sale (the woman who was
living in the property had passed away last year and nobody was living
in the property at the present time) and so there is no disclosure.
The seller's agent disclosed today that she had a letter from a
structural engineer hired by the sellers, commenting on the problem.
Some excerpts from the letter follow:

"Based on the topography of the lot it is likely that the west end of
the foundation was constructed on fill. The cracks are the result of
some settlment within that fill. The crack at the front is
approximately 1/8" wide and the east portion of the front foundation
has moved south about 1/4" out of plane with respect to the west
portion. The crack at the rear of the foundation is about 11 feet
from the corner of the house and it is also about 1/8" wide" [I didn't
measure the crack but it sure appears more than 1/8"; I could stick my
pinky in]

"Based on visual inspection of the color of the mortar inside the
cracks and the lack of sharp corners, and the existence of old
caulking inside the rear wall of the foundation, I conclude that the
cracks have existed in the foundation for many years".

"Any repairs made to the foundation cracks can be considered to be
cosmetic"

Our home inspector has cleverly let himself off the hook by noting the
crack in the inspection and referencing the structural engineer's
opinion in his report.

Here are my questions:

1) How serious is the problem? What is the guarantee that the crack is
not going to propagate? It seems to me that with freeze thaw cycles
and natural expansion and contraction this could open the crack up and
make it a horrible situation.
2) Was it legal for the seller's agent to not show us this letter
before the offer was made despite our question about disclosures? At
the very least it seems unethical to me.
3) Do I have the right to back out of the deal now? (I am talking to
my attorney tomorrow anyway).
4) If I decide not to go through with the purchase and sale can I
recover the cost of the inspection ($300 + $195 for a lead inspection)
from the seller's agent for not having shown us this letter when we
asked for disclosures? We would not have made an offer had the
disclosure been made to us previously.
5) Our agent (buyer's agent) claims that nothing illegal has been
done.

I somehow get the feeling that there is no one representing our
interests other than our attorney and that the Massachsetts
real-estate dislosure laws are a joke.

Frustrated and angry :-
-Prospectivehomebuyer

(Prospectivehomebuyer) wrote in message . com...
We live in the greater Boston area and recently made an offer on a
house which was accepted. The house is a one-story ranch with a
basement and is 48 years old. Today we had a home-inspection where
vertical cracks running on both the front and rear foundation were
discovered at approximately the same offset from the edge of the
house. We first saw the house during an open-house and asked the
seller's agent many times if there were any disclosures on the house
to which she replied that it was an estate sale (the woman who was
living in the property had passed away last year and nobody was living
in the property at the present time) and so there is no disclosure.
The seller's agent disclosed today that she had a letter from a
structural engineer hired by the sellers, commenting on the problem.
Some excerpts from the letter follow:

"Based on the topography of the lot it is likely that the west end of
the foundation was constructed on fill. The cracks are the result of
some settlment within that fill. The crack at the front is
approximately 1/8" wide and the east portion of the front foundation
has moved south about 1/4" out of plane with respect to the west
portion. The crack at the rear of the foundation is about 11 feet
from the corner of the house and it is also about 1/8" wide" [I didn't
measure the crack but it sure appears more than 1/8"; I could stick my
pinky in]

"Based on visual inspection of the color of the mortar inside the
cracks and the lack of sharp corners, and the existence of old
caulking inside the rear wall of the foundation, I conclude that the
cracks have existed in the foundation for many years".

"Any repairs made to the foundation cracks can be considered to be
cosmetic"

Our home inspector has cleverly let himself off the hook by noting the
crack in the inspection and referencing the structural engineer's
opinion in his report.

Here are my questions:

1) How serious is the problem? What is the guarantee that the crack is
not going to propagate? It seems to me that with freeze thaw cycles
and natural expansion and contraction this could open the crack up and
make it a horrible situation.
2) Was it legal for the seller's agent to not show us this letter
before the offer was made despite our question about disclosures? At
the very least it seems unethical to me.
3) Do I have the right to back out of the deal now? (I am talking to
my attorney tomorrow anyway).
4) If I decide not to go through with the purchase and sale can I
recover the cost of the inspection ($300 + $195 for a lead inspection)

from the seller's agent for not having shown us this letter when we
asked for disclosures? We would not have made an offer had the
disclosure been made to us previously.
5) Our agent (buyer's agent) claims that nothing illegal has been
done.

I somehow get the feeling that there is no one representing our
interests other than our attorney and that the Massachsetts
real-estate dislosure laws are a joke.

Frustrated and angry :-
-Prospectivehomebuyer


Everything sounds legal, if not ethical. Yes, you should be able to
get out of it because of this flaw. You will be left with your
personal fees and it's a good thing you had the inspection.
The crack may have occured shortly after the construction 48 years ago
and may not get worse. Nobody can tell you for sure. There are
engineering processes that can stabilize the foundation and guarantee
the work, but the house will always be under the stigma of this
inherent flaw.
If you do chose to proceed, I would at least get a reduction in price
equal to the highest estimate for a properly engineered fix. The
seller will have to disclose this to future shoppers and may have to
cut the price anyway. If you plan to stay there many years, perhaps
you could negotiate a super deal on this basis and benefit in the long
run.

I agree with first response, nothing illegal, maybe immoral.

Cracks in the foundation with old caulk means they have been there for a
while. All houses settle. None of this sounds too horribly out of the
ordinary.

If it bothers you, don't buy the house (you will still pay your costs). If
you were well advised, you would use it to have the price reduced & you can
move in at a better price. Save your money, don't get it fixed, as it is
only a cosmetic problem, not structural. Your house is not going to fall
down anytime soon.


--
Michael Papp
iNet Lending Group
www.iNet-Lender.com
MSN Messenger ID - iNet-Lending


"MaxAluminum" wrote in message
om...
(Prospectivehomebuyer) wrote in message
. com...
We live in the greater Boston area and recently made an offer on a
house which was accepted. The house is a one-story ranch with a
basement and is 48 years old. Today we had a home-inspection where
vertical cracks running on both the front and rear foundation were
discovered at approximately the same offset from the edge of the
house. We first saw the house during an open-house and asked the
seller's agent many times if there were any disclosures on the house
to which she replied that it was an estate sale (the woman who was
living in the property had passed away last year and nobody was living
in the property at the present time) and so there is no disclosure.
The seller's agent disclosed today that she had a letter from a
structural engineer hired by the sellers, commenting on the problem.
Some excerpts from the letter follow:

"Based on the topography of the lot it is likely that the west end of
the foundation was constructed on fill. The cracks are the result of
some settlment within that fill. The crack at the front is
approximately 1/8" wide and the east portion of the front foundation
has moved south about 1/4" out of plane with respect to the west
portion. The crack at the rear of the foundation is about 11 feet
from the corner of the house and it is also about 1/8" wide" [I didn't
measure the crack but it sure appears more than 1/8"; I could stick my
pinky in]

"Based on visual inspection of the color of the mortar inside the
cracks and the lack of sharp corners, and the existence of old
caulking inside the rear wall of the foundation, I conclude that the
cracks have existed in the foundation for many years".

"Any repairs made to the foundation cracks can be considered to be
cosmetic"

Our home inspector has cleverly let himself off the hook by noting the
crack in the inspection and referencing the structural engineer's
opinion in his report.

Here are my questions:

1) How serious is the problem? What is the guarantee that the crack is
not going to propagate? It seems to me that with freeze thaw cycles
and natural expansion and contraction this could open the crack up and
make it a horrible situation.
2) Was it legal for the seller's agent to not show us this letter
before the offer was made despite our question about disclosures? At
the very least it seems unethical to me.
3) Do I have the right to back out of the deal now? (I am talking to
my attorney tomorrow anyway).
4) If I decide not to go through with the purchase and sale can I
recover the cost of the inspection ($300 + $195 for a lead inspection)

from the seller's agent for not having shown us this letter when we
asked for disclosures? We would not have made an offer had the
disclosure been made to us previously.
5) Our agent (buyer's agent) claims that nothing illegal has been
done.

I somehow get the feeling that there is no one representing our
interests other than our attorney and that the Massachsetts
real-estate dislosure laws are a joke.

Frustrated and angry :-
-Prospectivehomebuyer


Everything sounds legal, if not ethical. Yes, you should be able to
get out of it because of this flaw. You will be left with your
personal fees and it's a good thing you had the inspection.
The crack may have occured shortly after the construction 48 years ago
and may not get worse. Nobody can tell you for sure. There are
engineering processes that can stabilize the foundation and guarantee
the work, but the house will always be under the stigma of this
inherent flaw.
If you do chose to proceed, I would at least get a reduction in price
equal to the highest estimate for a properly engineered fix. The
seller will have to disclose this to future shoppers and may have to
cut the price anyway. If you plan to stay there many years, perhaps
you could negotiate a super deal on this basis and benefit in the long
run.

On 16 Nov 2003 15:55:11 -0800, someone wrote:


I somehow get the feeling that there is no one representing our
interests other than our attorney...

Yes, that is *exactly* why the regulars here often tell people to get
attorneys for their real estate deals.

and that the Massachsetts
real-estate dislosure laws are a joke.

Well, it has just recently eveloved from buyer beware to more like
don't ask don't tell. I take it nothing less than affirnative duty to
disclose will satisfy you. But will you still feel that way when it
is your turn to sell? What does your attorney think?

They gave you the letter before you bought the house.

The letter says there is no problem. How could a letter saying there
was only a cosmetic problem, induce you NOT to buy? The opposite
seems more reasonable. Now, if the letter instead said wraning Will
Robinson, the house is about to collapse, then yeah they would need to
disclose that. BUT the letter actually says the OPPOSITE. So how can
there be a duty to disclose that someone said there is NO problem?
And you DID find the cracks, not hidden at all. What does YOUR
engineer say? If he says the cracks are a substantial defect, then
looks like you found something in the inspection that you can use to
exercize your cancellation clause (you do have one?).


Frustrated and angry :-
-Prospectivehomebuyer

Get over it. Its only a coupla hundred bucks on a multi hundred
THOUSAND dollar deal. You need to ante up to play this game.

-v.

On 17 Nov 2003 06:10:49 -0800, someone wrote:


If you do chose to proceed, I would at least get a reduction in price
equal to the highest estimate for a properly engineered fix....

And what on earth makes you think that the Sellers will agree to this,
when their engineer says it is not a problem?

You say you would "at least" get this? And what would you get "at
best"?

Big talk. I'd like to see you get this concession from them. Only
way to do it is if the "base" price is way over market, then the
"concession" brings it to where it shoulda been in the first place.
Like those car dealers who say "$3,000 guaranteed trade"; what do you
think they do to the "base" price before the trade allowance?
TANSTAAFL.

I don't think you or they will get anything of the sort, it will NOT
price acording to a formula, "asking price less the cost of ____ ".
It will sell at a price that reflects its age & condition as perceived
by the market, not that price less (double counting) its age and
condition! If the Sleer already thinks the price is fair for the
condition the house is in, he will not likely let the price down by
muc, only nuisance amount to throw a bone and save a deal, NOT LIKELY
the "highest estimate" for something he doesn't think is needed in the
first place.

Where do people think they are going to get the leverage to force such
big talk concessions?

-v.

v wrote:

On 16 Nov 2003 15:55:11 -0800, someone wrote:



I somehow get the feeling that there is no one representing our
interests other than our attorney...


Yes, that is *exactly* why the regulars here often tell people to get
attorneys for their real estate deals.


and that the Massachsetts
real-estate dislosure laws are a joke.


Well, it has just recently eveloved from buyer beware to more like
don't ask don't tell. I take it nothing less than affirnative duty to
disclose will satisfy you. But will you still feel that way when it
is your turn to sell? What does your attorney think?

They gave you the letter before you bought the house.

The letter says there is no problem. How could a letter saying there
was only a cosmetic problem, induce you NOT to buy? The opposite
seems more reasonable. Now, if the letter instead said wraning Will
Robinson, the house is about to collapse, then yeah they would need to
disclose that. BUT the letter actually says the OPPOSITE. So how can
there be a duty to disclose that someone said there is NO problem?
And you DID find the cracks, not hidden at all. What does YOUR
engineer say? If he says the cracks are a substantial defect, then
looks like you found something in the inspection that you can use to
exercize your cancellation clause (you do have one?).



Frustrated and angry :-
-Prospectivehomebuyer


Get over it. Its only a coupla hundred bucks on a multi hundred
THOUSAND dollar deal. You need to ante up to play this game.

-v.
Watch the wording, the report says any repairs made ARE cosmetic,
meaning that serious structural repair is necessary to stabilize it.
Now, while the house probably won't implode, a cracked foundation will
definitely cause other issues i.e. a way for water and insects to get
in. This will limit the usability of the basement. Also, a house will
sag over the settled part of the foundation. This will result in
problems such as doors/windows that won't close properly, cracked
drywall/plaster, etc. even if the floors seem solid and level. If the
house has settled as much as it is going to, then there should not be
too much evidence of new cracks in the plaster.

v wrote in reply to my original message:

Begin quote:

"Well, it has just recently eveloved from buyer beware to more like
don't ask don't tell. I take it nothing less than affirnative duty to
disclose will satisfy you. But will you still feel that way when it
is your turn to sell? What does your attorney think?

They gave you the letter before you bought the house.

The letter says there is no problem. How could a letter saying there
was only a cosmetic problem, induce you NOT to buy? The opposite
seems more reasonable. Now, if the letter instead said wraning Will
Robinson, the house is about to collapse, then yeah they would need to
disclose that. BUT the letter actually says the OPPOSITE. So how can
there be a duty to disclose that someone said there is NO problem?
And you DID find the cracks, not hidden at all. What does YOUR
engineer say? If he says the cracks are a substantial defect, then
looks like you found something in the inspection that you can use to
exercize your cancellation clause (you do have one?)."

End quote:

v-I respect your opinion but beg to differ.

In reply to your question if I will still feel that way when it is my
turn to sell. The answer is an emphatic YES. In fact I have the
moral authority to say this because this is precisely what I did when
I sold my home in Pennsylvania couple of years ago. Against my
agent's advice I ended up making a disclosure. I got more than asking
price for my home. Disclosing known issues/problems up front takes
away the buyer's negotiating points.

The seller can be firm on the price after disclosing the
issue/problem. I have no problem with that.

My bigger problem is not the defect (cracks) itself. It is that the
existence of such a letter was not shared with me before I decided to
put in an offer. What I make of the letter is my own business. The
fact that such an evaluation exists should have been disclosed to me.
Why go through all this pain? I am sure the sellers are not happy
with the outcome of this episode either. With the counsel of my
attorney I am walking away from this deal. I am afraid if they
concealed something like this what else is lurking for me after I get
in? I still stand by what I said. Seller disclosure laws in Mass.
are a joke. I do agree that a couple of hundred dollars is a small
price in the grander scheme of things. But 32 states require a
disclosure. Mass. is in the group of the other 18. Just my luck that
I live here.

Bruce Nolte N3LSY wrote in message ...

Watch the wording, the report says any repairs made ARE cosmetic,
meaning that serious structural repair is necessary to stabilize it.
Now, while the house probably won't implode, a cracked foundation will
definitely cause other issues i.e. a way for water and insects to get
in. This will limit the usability of the basement. Also, a house will
sag over the settled part of the foundation. This will result in
problems such as doors/windows that won't close properly, cracked
drywall/plaster, etc. even if the floors seem solid and level. If the
house has settled as much as it is going to, then there should not be
too much evidence of new cracks in the plaster.


Bruce,

This is the reason why we walked. The letter from the engineer is
very cleverly worded. At first glance it seemed to me that he was
saying it is ok. But when I thought about it more, it occurred to me
he is giving himself wide allowance. If the house falls apart he can
always say, "see I told you that you can only do cosmetic repairs".
The other thing that gave me pause was that it seemed that a number of
doors had been recently replaced. I have heard that doors/windows
stick on homes with this kind of problem. I am sure there is a buyer
out there who can live with this type of uncertainty. Just not me.

-Prospectivehomebuyer.

The letter says there is no problem. How could a letter saying there
was only a cosmetic problem, induce you NOT to buy? The opposite
seems more reasonable.

Why do you think the letter says there is no problem? I think the letter
says:

There's a crack in the foundation.
The previous owner appears to have attempted a repair.
This repair, and any other repairs they might have made, has only
cosmetic effect.

I think the letter is silent about whether the crack is a problem and, if
so, how serious it is.

Prospectivehomebuyer wrote:
Bruce Nolte N3LSY wrote in message ...


Watch the wording, the report says any repairs made ARE cosmetic,
meaning that serious structural repair is necessary to stabilize it.
Now, while the house probably won't implode, a cracked foundation will
definitely cause other issues i.e. a way for water and insects to get
in. This will limit the usability of the basement. Also, a house will
sag over the settled part of the foundation. This will result in
problems such as doors/windows that won't close properly, cracked
drywall/plaster, etc. even if the floors seem solid and level. If the
house has settled as much as it is going to, then there should not be
too much evidence of new cracks in the plaster.



Bruce,

This is the reason why we walked. The letter from the engineer is
very cleverly worded. At first glance it seemed to me that he was
saying it is ok. But when I thought about it more, it occurred to me
he is giving himself wide allowance. If the house falls apart he can
always say, "see I told you that you can only do cosmetic repairs".
The other thing that gave me pause was that it seemed that a number of
doors had been recently replaced. I have heard that doors/windows
stick on homes with this kind of problem. I am sure there is a buyer
out there who can live with this type of uncertainty. Just not me.

-Prospectivehomebuyer.

In my grandmother's old farmhouse where I currently reside, I constantly
am dealing with water coming in a seam in the foundation where an L was
added for the old well pump, and seepage from some small cracks. I also
have a problem with a "swayback" roof, and the misalignments have pretty
much made every door in the house unclosable without forcing them, or
having to shave them down.

In my old townhouse condo which was built in the late 70's, some of the
units were built on slabs on sandy fill at the edge of a swamp, and the
association had to spend tens of thousands of dollars to shore them up.
That, along with having to replace roofs with FRP after only 12 to 15
years (among other problems) left little money for improvements or
ammenities. Needless to say, all these problems did wonders for property
values there.

The farmhouse has been sold to a new owner and I will be the tenant for
only a couple more months, and I am building a new modular nearby. The
poured reinforced concrete foundation sets on virgin soil on a ridgetop,
so I hope it has a long, stable, and troublefree life.

(Prospectivehomebuyer) wrote in message . com...
v wrote in reply to my original message:

Begin quote:

"Well, it has just recently eveloved from buyer beware to more like
don't ask don't tell. I take it nothing less than affirnative duty to
disclose will satisfy you. But will you still feel that way when it
is your turn to sell? What does your attorney think?

They gave you the letter before you bought the house.

The letter says there is no problem. How could a letter saying there
was only a cosmetic problem, induce you NOT to buy? The opposite
seems more reasonable. Now, if the letter instead said wraning Will
Robinson, the house is about to collapse, then yeah they would need to
disclose that. BUT the letter actually says the OPPOSITE. So how can
there be a duty to disclose that someone said there is NO problem?
And you DID find the cracks, not hidden at all. What does YOUR
engineer say? If he says the cracks are a substantial defect, then
looks like you found something in the inspection that you can use to
exercize your cancellation clause (you do have one?)."

End quote:

v-I respect your opinion but beg to differ.

In reply to your question if I will still feel that way when it is my
turn to sell. The answer is an emphatic YES. In fact I have the
moral authority to say this because this is precisely what I did when
I sold my home in Pennsylvania couple of years ago. Against my
agent's advice I ended up making a disclosure. I got more than asking
price for my home. Disclosing known issues/problems up front takes
away the buyer's negotiating points.

The seller can be firm on the price after disclosing the
issue/problem. I have no problem with that.

My bigger problem is not the defect (cracks) itself. It is that the
existence of such a letter was not shared with me before I decided to
put in an offer. What I make of the letter is my own business. The
fact that such an evaluation exists should have been disclosed to me.
Why go through all this pain? I am sure the sellers are not happy
with the outcome of this episode either. With the counsel of my
attorney I am walking away from this deal. I am afraid if they
concealed something like this what else is lurking for me after I get
in? I still stand by what I said. Seller disclosure laws in Mass.
are a joke. I do agree that a couple of hundred dollars is a small
price in the grander scheme of things. But 32 states require a
disclosure. Mass. is in the group of the other 18. Just my luck that
I live here.


Apparently those cracks were open and visible. Even in states with
disclosure rules, the fact of something open and obvious takes the
seller off the hook. On the other hand, if the cracks were hidden
that's another matter. On occasion when I inspect a home for someone I
always walk the perimeter of the basement in search of cracks, recent
repairs, painting, piles stacked up, and moisture evidence. I suggest
making a check sheet for yourself with everything you want to check
from the basement to the roof with side notes to yourself as to what
to look for. Find out all you can find before making an offer or
paying a third party inspector. A quality inspection can take more
than a couple hours, but you can disqualify many potential homes
yourself often in minutes. Don't let real estate people trot you
through homes. If you go with the wife you can be off doing your thing
while she looks in the cabinets. She should know what to look for as
well.

(MaxAluminum) wrote in message

Apparently those cracks were open and visible. Even in states with
disclosure rules, the fact of something open and obvious takes the
seller off the hook. On the other hand, if the cracks were hidden
that's another matter. On occasion when I inspect a home for someone I
always walk the perimeter of the basement in search of cracks, recent
repairs, painting, piles stacked up, and moisture evidence. I suggest
making a check sheet for yourself with everything you want to check
from the basement to the roof with side notes to yourself as to what
to look for. Find out all you can find before making an offer or
paying a third party inspector. A quality inspection can take more
than a couple hours, but you can disqualify many potential homes
yourself often in minutes. Don't let real estate people trot you
through homes. If you go with the wife you can be off doing your thing
while she looks in the cabinets. She should know what to look for as
well.

Best piece of advice I ever received here. Yes. Mea Culpa on not
catching the cracks myself. Usually we are very careful. Got a
little carried away in this case since we loved the house and missed
this obvious defect. Next time we will do exactly as you suggested.

-Prospectivehomebuyer

Just in case anyone in this newsgroup is tempted to get involved with
Michael Papp of iNet Lending (screen name Canzie), I must tell you that
he is not to be trusted. In fact he is a thief and a liar. If you want
to deal with him at least do so knowing that much about him. When I say
he is a thief I mean that he orders services from individuals having no
intention to pay for them. That's defacto thievery. I have done good
work for him, engineering work that he now shows on one of his Web
sites, presenting it as if it were his own work (I can prove that and
prove that it is my own work, not his -- just email me by removing or
replacing the MUNGE text in my reply-to email address). He hasn't paid
even though he continued to order work done weeks after he was invoiced
and say that he was pleased with the progress made on the design
project. He doesn't intend to pay, as evidenced by the fact that he
doesn't return courteous emails and phone messages. I've confirmed that
he is active in business and is not ill or incapacitated (i.e. he has no
legitimate excuses).

If Michael Papp is willing to shaft individuals who do good work for him
and please him with their services imagine what he wouldn't mind doing
to those who simply want him to do good work for them . . . If you want
to take out a loan through him, do a little thinking and a little
research first. Michael Papp claims on one of his own Web sites,
"deadbeatdad.org", that he is "the most arrested man in New Jersey". Of
course he claims that the arrests were unjust, and indicates via many
examples just how much of a pycho his ex-wife is or was in getting him
charged falsely many times. He says that she claimed that he is a
"pathological liar" . . . as if that is an entirely untrue insult. I
now suspect that his wife may be the more honest and sane one of the
two. This man claims he has made two fortunes, and lost both, is now on
his 3rd. I suspect if he made two fortunes he lost them both for
reasons of poor judgement and dubious morals. Michael Papp also claims
in Usenet newsgroup postings that he is making big bucks, lots more than
his critics make. That's a rather telling claim, I think. If it's true
then he's not just a thief, he's particularly dispicable because he
could afford to pay me what he owes me, and if it's false then he's very
obviously a liar.

Don't trust this man.

He uses a number of email aliases, among them are these at bottom -- but
I've MUNGED them just to take the high ethical ground and not expose him
to any more SPAM than is necessary. However, in posting the email
addresses at all I consider that the good of those individuals who might
otherwise unwittingly get involved with this man outweighs consideration
for the man himself.

Beware these email addresses:
,
,
,
,


Mark 'Sporky' Stapleton
Charlotte, North Carolina

Canzie wrote:

I agree with first response, nothing illegal, maybe immoral.

Cracks in the foundation with old caulk means they have been there for a
while. All houses settle. None of this sounds too horribly out of the
ordinary.

If it bothers you, don't buy the house (you will still pay your costs). If
you were well advised, you would use it to have the price reduced & you can
move in at a better price. Save your money, don't get it fixed, as it is
only a cosmetic problem, not structural. Your house is not going to fall
down anytime soon.

--
Michael Papp
iNet Lending Group
www.iNet-Lender.com
MSN Messenger ID - iNet-Lending