In article ,
said...
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:17:06 -0500, Brad wrote:

I'm a DIYer and I've seen enough work by contractors that is poor practice
and even unsafe. I have to live in the house so I trust my work much more
than some guy who knows the aisles at Home Depot and has a sign on his
truck.

The point that you seem to have completely missed is that the work was
done without permits or inspections - regardless of how good the
homeowner may be at doing the work the fact remains that if they
didn't do it in accordance with codes that were current at the time
and then have it inspected and it passed, you are left with relying on
any faith you have in the unknown homeowner ability not to cross the
wires or connect the gas lines to the water lines!

If you can't determine those kinds of issues yourself you should be
renting.

The other point that was developed as the thread went along was the
fact that features that were potentially hazardous to the health and
safety of the occupants may have been ignored by the homeowner, i.e.
proper egress from the area that was finished.

Egress is a bunch of crap. Sure, it's a safety issue if you're going to
use the room as a basement, but you either take it as an accepted risk or
you don't live in the room. I lived in a basement with no egress for many
years growing up at a time when more than 3/4 of the basements in my
neighborhood were finished with nothing but a set of stairs going to the
main floor and many of those had kids living in them. Just because we are
an overly regulatory society does not mean that you have to have a
friggin' big window in a basement to use it as a bedroom.

Trent© wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:31:46 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:


Hi,
My present house was 100% developed when built by my custom builder.
B4 I used to finish basement myself. Our city has DIY permit for electrical
work and plumbing. Cost is minimal. It includes two inspections. This
goes on city record which means you met the code requirement.
If everything is done in private, there is no supporting document
whether the work was done per code. Insurance coimpany can pick on this as
their excuse. If they tell the owner, your wiring was sub standard which
caused fire. How can the owner counter that?


He doesn't hafta. The burden of proof is on the insurance company.


Have a nice week...

Trent

Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity!

Hi,
Are you a lawyer?
I think burden of proof is on the owner. Not having a supporting
document is already an onus on the owner, IMO. I am not a lawyer.
A retired EE. BTW, inspector asked if I was an electrician when he came
for an inspection.
Tony

Basha wrote:

Hi,

I am in house hunting for the last one month and found a suitable
house recently. I am thinking of buying it. When I went to to get the
survey map from the city governmemnt, I learned that they don't have a
record of basement finished. The previous owner who actually completed
the basement didn't get the permit for it. The basement has 2
bedrooms, one bathroom and a large family room with fire place. Is
there any risk involved in buying this house?

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

"Brad" wrote in message
news:MPG.1a1e25161ac333bd98b986@news...
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:17:06 -0500, Brad wrote:


Egress is a bunch of crap. Sure, it's a safety issue if you're going to
use the room as a basement, but you either take it as an accepted risk or
you don't live in the room. I lived in a basement with no egress for many
years growing up at a time when more than 3/4 of the basements in my
neighborhood were finished with nothing but a set of stairs going to the
main floor and many of those had kids living in them. Just because we are
an overly regulatory society does not mean that you have to have a
friggin' big window in a basement to use it as a bedroom.

Exactly. You cannot legally claim a space is a bedroom unless it meets
egress requirements.
You won't be able to claim the room as a bedroom when you sell the property.
I don't think this stops too many people from using these as bedrooms. Nor
should it.
I certainly agree about the overly regulatory society. I'm still trying to
figure out how we all survived during the "dark ages" when people actually
had to think for themselves, and take calculated risks.
It's a wonder that we all survived. Sure am glad I have someone else do
that thinking for me.
I feel much safer...................NOT
Dave

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

Having just sold and bought a house, the buyer pays for any inspection that
he wants. The seller's obligation is to disclose truthfully what he knows
about the property.

At least around here that is the how it is done.
--
Ron
Port Dover Ontario

In article WA3tb.691$Dw6.9760@attbi_s02, said...

"Brad" wrote in message
news:MPG.1a1e25161ac333bd98b986@news...
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:17:06 -0500, Brad wrote:


Egress is a bunch of crap. Sure, it's a safety issue if you're going to
use the room as a basement, but you either take it as an accepted risk or
you don't live in the room. I lived in a basement with no egress for many
years growing up at a time when more than 3/4 of the basements in my
neighborhood were finished with nothing but a set of stairs going to the
main floor and many of those had kids living in them. Just because we are
an overly regulatory society does not mean that you have to have a
friggin' big window in a basement to use it as a bedroom.

Exactly. You cannot legally claim a space is a bedroom unless it meets
egress requirements.
You won't be able to claim the room as a bedroom when you sell the property.
I don't think this stops too many people from using these as bedrooms. Nor
should it.
I certainly agree about the overly regulatory society. I'm still trying to
figure out how we all survived during the "dark ages" when people actually
had to think for themselves, and take calculated risks.
It's a wonder that we all survived. Sure am glad I have someone else do
that thinking for me.
I feel much safer...................NOT

Well, at least we are combatting Darwinism by perpetuating the lives of
the stupid. If we didn't the Democrats would have nobody to vote for
them.

I find it boring to have to read the same post over and over in its entirety
and assumed others did, too.

On 13 Nov 2003 22:53:59 GMT, (Patscga) wrote:

Please learn to quote the article to which you are responding.

Tlle me what I did wrong.
Pat

Yer not including any of the header of the message to which yer
responding, Pat.

The above is a LITTLE better...but you need to include even more of
the message that yer trying to answer.


Have a nice week...

Trent

Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity!








Pat

(Basha) wrote in message om...
Hi,

I am in house hunting for the last one month and found a suitable
house recently. I am thinking of buying it. When I went to to get the
survey map from the city governmemnt, I learned that they don't have a
record of basement finished. The previous owner who actually completed
the basement didn't get the permit for it. The basement has 2
bedrooms, one bathroom and a large family room with fire place. Is
there any risk involved in buying this house?


Risk in what sense?

Certainly there is a risk that the basement does not meet code, but
this is probably fixable.

With finished basements there is always a risk that your basement
might someday flood, so that's something I would consider and weigh.

There is a risk that your property tax will go up.

There is a risk that you may overestimate the value of having a
finsihed basement when you make your offer. This would be my primary
concern, because it's not something you can undo.

From a financial perspective, I would be careful about that last risk
when making my offer. I just bought a house with a finished basement
(there was a permit and everything passed code, so I'm not worried
about that part). For me and my needs, it adds substantially to the
usable square footage of the home (two "bedrooms" and a large full
bath), extra sq footage I couldn't afford otherwise.

The way it was designed, you don't get the impression you are in a
finished basement. Everything has been finished very nicely with the
same quality of materials in the rest of the house so it doesn't
"feel" sub-par. Plus the way the stairs are configured, it flows
nicely with the rest of the house and doesn't make you feel you're
entering a basement at all.

However, it was very tempting upon initial viewing to consider these
extra bedrooms and make a bid as if it was a 4-bedroom house, not a
2-bedroom house with two "bonus" basement rooms that *might* be used
as bedrooms (or may someday flood and be completely unusable). I was
very careful in determining what I wanted to offer. I did not want to
make the mistake of comparing the value of this house to a true
4-bedroom. I compared it instead to a 2-bedroom, and added a little
extra for the fact that it had a nicely finished basement. This was
exactly how the assessor ended up looking at it, too.

Incidentally, it was advertised by the realtor as a 4 bedroom, but
when I saw these two bedrooms, I politely corrected her on that.

I feel sorry for my neighbors who didn't think it through the same way
I did; they ended up, IMHO, grossly overpaying for their property. Oh
well... I suppose that ultimately when it comes time to sell, I may
luck out and find someone willing to make that mistake, too.

Buyer should also be careful when assessing the value of finished
attic space.

jen

In article ,
said...
and assumed others did, too.

On 13 Nov 2003 22:53:59 GMT, (Patscga) wrote:

Please learn to quote the article to which you are responding.

Tlle me what I did wrong.

Yer not including any of the header of the message to which yer
responding, Pat.

I find it boring to have to read the same post over and over in its entirety

That's not the issue. Most people have a reader that only shows unread
messages, so if they already read the message to which you were responding
in a previous session they will not see what in the hell you are talking
about without looking back through old articles.

In article ,
said...
Buyer should also be careful when assessing the value of finished
attic space.

Attic space is typically better than basement space because it isn't below
ground. As long as the place is insulater properly and isn't a sauna in
the summer and a freezer in the winter it is no different than an upstairs
room (other than the extra flight of stairs).

Ron wrote:

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

Having just sold and bought a house, the buyer pays for any inspection that
he wants. The seller's obligation is to disclose truthfully what he knows
about the property.

At least around here that is the how it is done.

If finishing the basement requires a permit and the seller did so
without one then what they have done is ILLEGAL. This could create a
mess for the buyer. In a situation like this it should be up to the
seller to prove that the improvements were done safely.

In article , C G
said...
Ron wrote:

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Having just sold and bought a house, the buyer pays for any inspection that
he wants. The seller's obligation is to disclose truthfully what he knows
about the property.

At least around here that is the how it is done.

If finishing the basement requires a permit and the seller did so
without one then what they have done is ILLEGAL. This could create a
mess for the buyer. In a situation like this it should be up to the
seller to prove that the improvements were done safely.

It may be against the town's regulations, but it is hardly "ILLEGAL."
It's about as illegal as speeding.

"Brad" wrote in message
news:MPG.1a1f43b2ac83370d98b9a2@news...
In article , C G
said...
Ron wrote:

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if
there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you
close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out
by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems
uncovered.

Having just sold and bought a house, the buyer pays for any inspection
that
he wants. The seller's obligation is to disclose truthfully what he
knows
about the property.

At least around here that is the how it is done.

If finishing the basement requires a permit and the seller did so
without one then what they have done is ILLEGAL. This could create a
mess for the buyer. In a situation like this it should be up to the
seller to prove that the improvements were done safely.

It may be against the town's regulations, but it is hardly "ILLEGAL."
It's about as illegal as speeding.


Actually, IF work was done, that required proper permits, and they were NOT
pulled, then, the local jurisdiction CAN have the work removed....fines will
be issued in the least...here it is twice the original amount.
IF the work was done by a non licenced person, in the event that a licenced
person was required to do it, and no permits (of course) pulled, then the
person that actually did the work can be hit with a felony charge, and jail
time.
Happens ALL the time in areas that follow the law...particularly here...in
his particular area, it might not be the case.

Brad wrote:
It may be against the town's regulations, but it is hardly "ILLEGAL."
It's about as illegal as speeding.

I'd love to be in the courtroom when you try to use that kind of
argument.

C G wrote:
Brad wrote:

It may be against the town's regulations, but it is hardly "ILLEGAL."
It's about as illegal as speeding.


I'd love to be in the courtroom when you try to use that kind of
argument.
Hi,
Some folks have very interesting attitude towards law/regulations.
Maybe law is there because of people like that. Very funny!
Tony

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:33:13 -0500, Brad wrote:


Egress is a bunch of crap. Sure, it's a safety issue if you're going to
use the room as a basement, but you either take it as an accepted risk or
you don't live in the room.

Then you won't buy the property!

I lived in a basement with no egress for many
years growing up at a time when more than 3/4 of the basements in my
neighborhood were finished with nothing but a set of stairs going to the
main floor and many of those had kids living in them.

Gosh,you should thank the gods that you are alive today and didn't get
roasted in a fire that trapped you in your cellar!

Just because we are
an overly regulatory society does not mean that you have to have a
friggin' big window in a basement to use it as a bedroom.

Not a ****in' big window, just one that is adequate for a person to
use to escape in necessary! (Call a ****ing spade a spade for the gods
sake - what are you trying to prove with your ****ing use of the word
"friggin'" ? (You ain't fooling anyone!)

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 12:08:22 GMT, "DaveG" wrote:

I'm still trying to
figure out how we all survived during the "dark ages" when people actually
had to think for themselves, and take calculated risks.

did you ever consider that everyone didn't survive?

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:56:53 -0500, "Ron" wrote:


Having just sold and bought a house, the buyer pays for any inspection that
he wants. The seller's obligation is to disclose truthfully what he knows
about the property.

Apparently it is more than just a matter of "home inspection" in this
case considerable construction modification were made to the property
without pulling appropriate permits and having the work inspected by
the appropriate code enforcement authorities - this is something that
the seller should be expected to resolve before settlement and the
closing on the property at the time of the sale!

wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:33:13 -0500, Brad wrote:


Egress is a bunch of crap. Sure, it's a safety issue if you're going to
use the room as a basement, but you either take it as an accepted risk or
you don't live in the room.


Then you won't buy the property!


I lived in a basement with no egress for many
years growing up at a time when more than 3/4 of the basements in my
neighborhood were finished with nothing but a set of stairs going to the
main floor and many of those had kids living in them.


Gosh,you should thank the gods that you are alive today and didn't get
roasted in a fire that trapped you in your cellar!


Just because we are
an overly regulatory society does not mean that you have to have a
friggin' big window in a basement to use it as a bedroom.


Not a ****in' big window, just one that is adequate for a person to
use to escape in necessary! (Call a ****ing spade a spade for the gods
sake - what are you trying to prove with your ****ing use of the word
"friggin'" ? (You ain't fooling anyone!)

Hi,
Some has bird's brain. Common sense is very rare lately.
Tony

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:58:23 -0500, someone wrote:


That's not true at all. I sold a house last year with a basement that I
did off the books. I also know many people that have done the same thing
and had no problem. It is quite a common occurrence, legal or not.

As a practical matter, I agree to the extent that it would be OK with
'the bank' as long as the illegally finished area is not being relied
upon to acheive the required value of the property. OTOH if the bank
thinks it is mortgaging a 4-bedroom 3 bath home, but one bedroom and
one bath are illegal in the basement, then they sure as hell WOULD
care, IF their appraiser was on the ball enough to catch it, which he
should, but often will not.

-v.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:40:06 GMT, someone wrote:


I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

Then he will never buy this house. The seller will not agree to those
condition, PLUS will hate his guts for turning him in to the city.
And after he has to pay thos big fines and compliance costs, he will
now want more for the house since the addition is now legal!

(Or, the city makes him tear it out; did the buyer WANT those
features? Just shot himself in the foot!)

-v.

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 01:46:53 GMT, someone wrote:

Brad wrote:
It may be against the town's regulations, but it is hardly "ILLEGAL."
It's about as illegal as speeding.

I'd love to be in the courtroom when you try to use that kind of
argument.

Here at my office, my landlord got summonsed in to court for letting
me move in before the handicapped rails were installed in the
bathroom!!!!

-v.

v wrote:

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:40:06 GMT, someone wrote:

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

Then he will never buy this house. The seller will not agree to those
condition, PLUS will hate his guts for turning him in to the city.

How do you know what the seller will or will not agree to? The seller
has put himself in a very bad negotiating position by making unpermitted
improvements to his house. Who said anything about turning him into the
city?

And after he has to pay thos big fines and compliance costs, he will
now want more for the house since the addition is now legal!

All based on your incorrect assumption that the city found out.


(Or, the city makes him tear it out; did the buyer WANT those
features? Just shot himself in the foot!)

Might be better than buying a house with shoddy, unsafe modifications.

Actually, I was referring to the guy that stated that the tax man dont care
if you dont pay taxes on the finished basement.
For some reason, my newsreader didnt reply with his message.

Usually if you pullout the stove and sink the banks' inspector will overlook
the basement's lack of permit. I would see what happens.
"C G" wrote in message
.. .
Basha wrote:

Hi,

I am in house hunting for the last one month and found a suitable
house recently. I am thinking of buying it. When I went to to get the
survey map from the city governmemnt, I learned that they don't have a
record of basement finished. The previous owner who actually completed
the basement didn't get the permit for it. The basement has 2
bedrooms, one bathroom and a large family room with fire place. Is
there any risk involved in buying this house?

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

I agree with V. If you turn the seller into the city he will hate you and
probably find a way not to sell you the house. But if it's important to you
to get everything aboveboard then you will have to take the chance and see
what happens. The bank that inspects the house may require the permits
anyway. However, they may overlook the basement. It all depends.

"v" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:40:06 GMT, someone wrote:


I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

Then he will never buy this house. The seller will not agree to those
condition, PLUS will hate his guts for turning him in to the city.
And after he has to pay thos big fines and compliance costs, he will
now want more for the house since the addition is now legal!

(Or, the city makes him tear it out; did the buyer WANT those
features? Just shot himself in the foot!)

-v.

What are you talking about?

Houseslave wrote:

Usually if you pullout the stove and sink the banks' inspector will overlook
the basement's lack of permit. I would see what happens.
"C G" wrote in message
.. .
Basha wrote:

Hi,

I am in house hunting for the last one month and found a suitable
house recently. I am thinking of buying it. When I went to to get the
survey map from the city governmemnt, I learned that they don't have a
record of basement finished. The previous owner who actually completed
the basement didn't get the permit for it. The basement has 2
bedrooms, one bathroom and a large family room with fire place. Is
there any risk involved in buying this house?

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Chuck

"Trent©" wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 03:24:50 GMT, (v) wrote:

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:58:23 -0500, someone wrote:


That's not true at all. I sold a house last year with a basement that I
did off the books. I also know many people that have done the same thing
and had no problem. It is quite a common occurrence, legal or not.

As a practical matter, I agree to the extent that it would be OK with
'the bank' as long as the illegally finished area is not being relied
upon to acheive the required value of the property. OTOH if the bank
thinks it is mortgaging a 4-bedroom 3 bath home, but one bedroom and
one bath are illegal in the basement, then they sure as hell WOULD
care, IF their appraiser was on the ball enough to catch it, which he
should, but often will not.

-v.

All the banks pretty much care about is if the building really
exists...and if you have insurance on it for the amount of your loan.
They don't care what the inside looks like. Many homes, of course,
are sold for cash.

This is a bit inaccurate. The banks want to be sure that the house can
be sold for at least the amount of the mortgate in case you default.
This is part of why they insist on an appraisal, which includes an
assessment of the inside and outside of the house.


And very few rooms inside the house have any designated purpose.
Special-purpose fixtures...like a toilet, sink, lack of window,
etc...can sometimes designate the purpose. But other rooms can simply
be designated as whatever the present owner wants to do with it.

Maybe in your mind, but not necessarily in the minds of the appraiser or
the tax authority. Generally, if a room has a closet it is considered a
bedroom. Many people get around a bedroom limitation on their septic
permit by adding rooms which do not contain a closet.


My house is over 100 years old...and has gone from 2 bedroom to 4
bedroom to 2 bedroom about a half-dozen times...depending on how the
current owner uses the various rooms. I now have a 2 bedroom...with a
computer room and a large storage room.

You are talking about how you are using the rooms, not how it would be
classified on an appraisal or tax evaluation.


My house will be advertised as a 4 bedroom when and if I sell it. It
was listed as a 4 bedroom when I bought it...and it had 2 beds in the
house when I took the tour.

Counting beds to evaluate the actual number of bedrooms is meaningless.
I have a 4 bedroom beach house, which contains 5 beds. Should I have it
reclassified as a 5 bedrrom because of the bed count? Of course not.

Chuck

The only party that is concerned with all the permits is the buyer and the
buyer's bank. If the bank doesn't ask for the permits then the buyer has to
make a deciscion whether or not they care. Many banks will tell you to
cover up the stove so they can give the OK for the mortgage.

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:33:25 GMT, "Houseslave"
wrote:

Usually if you pullout the stove and sink the banks' inspector will overlook
the basement's lack of permit.



What sink and stove?

If you try to sell a house without a sink in my area you would never
get a loan and if you tried that without a stove where I came from you
would never get a c.o.!

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 18:31:25 GMT, "Houseslave"
wrote:

The only party that is concerned with all the permits is the buyer and the
buyer's bank. If the bank doesn't ask for the permits then the buyer has to
make a deciscion whether or not they care. Many banks will tell you to
cover up the stove so they can give the OK for the mortgage.


Maybe in the rural slum where you have your hovel, but you can't get a
C.O. without everything being up to code or grand fathered here!

"Trent©" wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:52:08 GMT, C G
wrote:

All the banks pretty much care about is if the building really
exists...and if you have insurance on it for the amount of your loan.
They don't care what the inside looks like. Many homes, of course,
are sold for cash.

This is a bit inaccurate. The banks want to be sure that the house can
be sold for at least the amount of the mortgate in case you default.
This is part of why they insist on an appraisal, which includes an
assessment of the inside and outside of the house.

What I said was 'for the amount of the loan'. We're way beyond the
point already that you bring up here. The loan has already been
approved...yer credit has been checked, etc. Now they go out and see
if there's a building there...and if that building is worth 120%
(roughly) of what you want to borrow...assuming their gonna give you
an 80-20 loan.

What you said is the banks only care that you have insurance for the
amount of the loan. Now you are changing what you said to confirm my
clarification.


And, in my area, the appraisers NEVER come inside the house...nor do
the insurance companies. Its a waste of time for them. All the
insurance companies hafta do is ask questions about the house over the
phone. Most will come out later and take a picture of the
place...again, to verify that the building exists.

In this area, and many other areas in the country, the appraisers come
inside the house. The finish and condition of the interior is a
significant factor in coming up with an accurate estimate.


And, unless you have a newly built home, they have a database to do
any necessary comparison checking.

They still do an appraisal which includes a walk through.



And very few rooms inside the house have any designated purpose.
Special-purpose fixtures...like a toilet, sink, lack of window,
etc...can sometimes designate the purpose. But other rooms can simply
be designated as whatever the present owner wants to do with it.

Maybe in your mind, but not necessarily in the minds of the appraiser or
the tax authority. Generally, if a room has a closet it is considered a
bedroom. Many people get around a bedroom limitation on their septic
permit by adding rooms which do not contain a closet.

I've seen a lot of hallways with closets...and a lot of other rooms
that were not bedrooms with closets, also. And there are a LOT of
bedrooms WITHOUT closets. My house has 2 of them. Many of the older
houses were built without closets in the bedroom.

The room I'm sitting in now has a closet. I use it as a computer room
for some of my computers. Its not on the tax assessment as a
bedroom...simply because I don't USE it as a bedroom. But it was
listed as a bedroom before.

The tax assesor does not care how you use the room. They care if it
could function as a bedroom. Are you sure it is not listed as a
bedroom?



My house is over 100 years old...and has gone from 2 bedroom to 4
bedroom to 2 bedroom about a half-dozen times...depending on how the
current owner uses the various rooms. I now have a 2 bedroom...with a
computer room and a large storage room.

You are talking about how you are using the rooms, not how it would be
classified on an appraisal or tax evaluation.

They are classified as how you use them. Why would you think
otherwise?

You are simply wrong on this. No matter how many times you say it you
will still be wrong. I cannot reduce the number of bedrooms in my house
by merely not using a room as a bedroom. You can continue to delude
yourself, but you will not delude the tax assesor. Perhaps an older
house which has bedrooms without closets could have this happen, but not
a typical house built in the last 30 or 40 years.


My house will be advertised as a 4 bedroom when and if I sell it. It
was listed as a 4 bedroom when I bought it...and it had 2 beds in the
house when I took the tour.

Counting beds to evaluate the actual number of bedrooms is meaningless.
I have a 4 bedroom beach house, which contains 5 beds. Should I have it
reclassified as a 5 bedrrom because of the bed count? Of course not.

Of course not. If you have a bed in your bathroom...that doesn't make
that room a bedroom. And you can also have 2 beds in the same room.
I don't know where that 5th bed is located.

But if you have a full-size bed in a room, its pretty much an
indication that you expect someone to sleep in it...ergo, its a
bedroom.

And a lack of a bed does not magically make it not a bedroom.


The BEGINNING test for a bedroom is...is the primary purpose of that
room to have someone sleep in it. Then more logical testing is done.

Talk to a tax assessor or appraiser some time. I think you will find
that your test is misguided.

"Trent©" wrote:

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 20:43:54 GMT, C G
wrote:

The tax assesor does not care how you use the room. They care if it
could function as a bedroom. Are you sure it is not listed as a
bedroom?

If they don't care how you use the room, why would they care if it can
function as a bedroom?

Because that is part of the way they price houses.


They are classified as how you use them. Why would you think
otherwise?

You are simply wrong on this. No matter how many times you say it you
will still be wrong. I cannot reduce the number of bedrooms in my house
by merely not using a room as a bedroom. You can continue to delude
yourself, but you will not delude the tax assesor. Perhaps an older
house which has bedrooms without closets could have this happen, but not
a typical house built in the last 30 or 40 years.

If I am 'simply wrong', how can there be any 'perhaps'? lol

There are millions of homes that are over 40 years old. On my block
along, there are 30 homes that are over 100 years old.

And millions more that are newer than 40 years old.


But if you have a full-size bed in a room, its pretty much an
indication that you expect someone to sleep in it...ergo, its a
bedroom.

And a lack of a bed does not magically make it not a bedroom.

I think you've got your mindset inside that 30 year old house. Take a
tour sometime of a 100 year old house. Those get appraised, too.

And the appraisers still can figure out which room is a bedroom,
regardless of whether it has a bed or not.


The BEGINNING test for a bedroom is...is the primary purpose of that
room to have someone sleep in it. Then more logical testing is done.

Talk to a tax assessor or appraiser some time. I think you will find
that your test is misguided.

Again...I think you're thinking of only the newer homes...half or full
bath built next to a room large enough to accommodate a bed. Pretty
much defines the room, doesn't it.

But rooms in older homes aren't as definitive.

Whatever. Continue to delude yourself if you want. The tax person is
more than capable of figuring it out.

OK.
I went to the city office directly and talked to one of the inspectors
and few other guys in community development, construction and
engineering dept. They said, once the construction is done they are
not going to give any permit and they are not going to come to the
house to check it. They also said the previous owner completed the
basement and may not have reported to city to save some taxes. I asked
is part of the house "ILLEGAL". They said it is not called illegal but
improper, also said there are quiet a no of people who don't report
their enhancements to their houses which may involve adding a bathroom
or bedroom etc. The risk is whether they have done the proper electic
and plumbing work or not. I asked him how to ensure whether it is done
in a proper way. He told me it is very difficult to find out once it
is done. It may involve tearingup the sheets covering the electric and
plumbing work. He also advised me to ask the seller to put a $10k in
an escrow account which cover up the costs if anything happens in the
next 3 or 5 years. If nothing happens at the end of 3 or 5 years,
seller will get the money back.

Anyways, my realtor brought a market analysis of the houses in this
area (Plymouth, Minnesota) and we came to an amount which we can
offer. We offred the seller 5k more than the average selling price and
also I bear all the minor repairs in the house. The average price is
20k less than the seller's list price. Repairs in the house a One
of the closet door broke may need a replacement, all the sloset doors
are stick to the carpet and are difficult to open and they may need a
half inch cut at the bottom of the doors. Family room doesn't have the
the air intake, hot air comes from the furnace but there is no vent to
take the air from that room. It's a closed room. Back side of the
house some of the vinyl sheets came out of the wall. It needs a fix
and there are many other small things. Those I can do myself. (My
realtor said the total may cost around $3000). 2 days back we bid with
condition-asking the seller to put the money $10k in escrow account.
Seller rejected the bid asking $10k more and didn't like the condition
of keeping the money in escrow account.

That's what happend in the last week.

The house is 1994 built, split level completely finished (2260sft) in
Plymouth, Minnesota. (suburb of Minneapolis)

-Basha

On 17 Nov 2003 11:26:50 -0800, someone wrote:


... He also advised me to ask the seller to put a $10k in
an escrow account which cover up the costs if anything happens in the
next 3 or 5 years. If nothing happens at the end of 3 or 5 years,
seller will get the money back.

Shows you what happens when you take real estate advice from an
inspector.

Chances slim to none that any seller would agree to skip $10,000 for 3
to 5 years, based on the buyer not coming up with "ANYTHING" in that
time. What a crock of bull, you showed yourself to be a fool if you
tried to impose this under those circumstances.

(BTW, what did your bank think of the $10k escrow? Or didn't you ask
them yet.)

-v.

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:21:00 GMT, someone wrote:


I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Then he will never buy this house. The seller will not agree to those
condition, PLUS will hate his guts for turning him in to the city.

How do you know what the seller will or will not agree to?

Have you bought many properties where the Seller agreed to pay for
*any* problems that turned up? I have been buying and selling for
over 20 years and it just doesn't happen frequently enought to be a
realistic suggestion. (I've never seen it happen at all, but in then
infinity of the net, am leaving a way out.)

Sure the Buyer can have an inspection. But the Seller is HIGHLY
UNLIKELY TO THE POINT OF IT BEING RIDICULOUS TO EVEN WASTE YOUR TIME
ASKING, to agree to fix "any" problem found. Buyer can show the
Seller the problems and ask, or even get an agreement that (say) the
first $1,000 in repairs is covered, but rational sellers will not
agree to open ended clauses that encourage the Buyer to try to get a
free renovation out of the sale. And if you ask for unreasonable
stuff, you are likely to **** off the Seller and get thrown out of the
deal and NOT get any concessions.

And don't say how do I know the Seller won't NEGOTIATE, SURE he
probably WILL "negotiate", but that is not the same as agreeing to
your ridiculous terms. Whatever makes you think he WILL agree? And
DON'T say there is no harm in asking, there certainly is, if you knew
anything about negotiation.


-v.

In article ,
said...
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:21:00 GMT, someone wrote:


I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Then he will never buy this house. The seller will not agree to those
condition, PLUS will hate his guts for turning him in to the city.

How do you know what the seller will or will not agree to?

Have you bought many properties where the Seller agreed to pay for
*any* problems that turned up? I have been buying and selling for
over 20 years and it just doesn't happen frequently enought to be a
realistic suggestion. (I've never seen it happen at all, but in then
infinity of the net, am leaving a way out.)

Septic and wells are the main exceptions to that rule. If a septic or
well fails inspection the seller has to fix or replace it and will
typically not get a penny more on the market for the house. It happened
to me. I never understood why the market worked that way because if I'm
comparing two similar septic houses, the age of the systems is a big
factor for me.

v wrote:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:21:00 GMT, someone wrote:

I would contact the local building inspection department to see if there
is any way to have it inspected after the fact. If there is, insist
that the seller do this, and correct any violations, before you close.
If not, insist that the seller pay to have the basement checked out by a
qualified building inspector and pay for any safety problems uncovered.

Then he will never buy this house. The seller will not agree to those
condition, PLUS will hate his guts for turning him in to the city.

How do you know what the seller will or will not agree to?

Have you bought many properties where the Seller agreed to pay for
*any* problems that turned up? I have been buying and selling for
over 20 years and it just doesn't happen frequently enought to be a
realistic suggestion. (I've never seen it happen at all, but in then
infinity of the net, am leaving a way out.)

Yes, I have. If there is a problem that needs to be fixed the seller is
going to have to either pay for it, lower the price, or tell the buyer
"no deal".


Sure the Buyer can have an inspection. But the Seller is HIGHLY
UNLIKELY TO THE POINT OF IT BEING RIDICULOUS TO EVEN WASTE YOUR TIME
ASKING, to agree to fix "any" problem found. Buyer can show the
Seller the problems and ask, or even get an agreement that (say) the
first $1,000 in repairs is covered, but rational sellers will not
agree to open ended clauses that encourage the Buyer to try to get a
free renovation out of the sale. And if you ask for unreasonable
stuff, you are likely to **** off the Seller and get thrown out of the
deal and NOT get any concessions.

The trouble with this seller is that he did something in violation of
local building regs. The buyer in this case has him by the balls.


And don't say how do I know the Seller won't NEGOTIATE, SURE he
probably WILL "negotiate", but that is not the same as agreeing to
your ridiculous terms. Whatever makes you think he WILL agree? And
DON'T say there is no harm in asking, there certainly is, if you knew
anything about negotiation.

Are you finished arguing with yourself? I never said he would agree.
However, since he's in a pretty difficult situation, the odds are good
he would.

v wrote:

On 17 Nov 2003 11:26:50 -0800, someone wrote:

... He also advised me to ask the seller to put a $10k in
an escrow account which cover up the costs if anything happens in the
next 3 or 5 years. If nothing happens at the end of 3 or 5 years,
seller will get the money back.

Shows you what happens when you take real estate advice from an
inspector.

Chances slim to none that any seller would agree to skip $10,000 for 3
to 5 years, based on the buyer not coming up with "ANYTHING" in that
time. What a crock of bull, you showed yourself to be a fool if you
tried to impose this under those circumstances.

You're just full of yourself aren't you? It must be an awesome task to
be omniscient. "The seller won't do this". "The seller won't agree to
that". You should write some books to share your amazing grasp on human
behaviour.

Just some friendly advice:

Real estate people don't give reliable estimates of what repairs will cost.
Especially when you are the buyer, and the recipient of these estimates.
It's not their area of expertise, really, but they do have ample motivation
to answer those questions and smooth things over. $3000 may cover it, maybe
only if done poorly by a very low quality contractor. It may not even cover
it then. Also, asking a seller to throw $10k in escrow against unknown
problems is pretty wishful thinking - think about it, given reversed roles,
would you be willing to do it? There's always someone, somewhere, who will
buy as is.

The bottom line is that any house is a risk. Even one unmodified by the
owner, in apparently good shape could have killer black mold hanging around
somewhere waiting to bloom. You'll drive yourself nuts trying to cover every
liability. In the end, you have to seek trusted advice about what real
problems the house has, use your own eyes, and make a decision. Find or hire
an independant handyman, and pay to have him estimate the work that needs to
be done - then you know, and you have a somewhat documented case for
adjusting the price to cover repairs. Also, the handyman/contractor's advice
about the house would be a valuable addition to the inspector's. Inspector's
are good for checking some major things, and certain safety things, but they
miss some very obvious things you will end up having to fix.

Just remember, when you are the buyer, and the agent says "Oh, that? That's
no problem!" they really mean "Oh, that? That's no problem....for me!"


"Basha" wrote in message
m...
OK.
I went to the city office directly and talked to one of the inspectors
and few other guys in community development, construction and
engineering dept. They said, once the construction is done they are
not going to give any permit and they are not going to come to the
house to check it. They also said the previous owner completed the
basement and may not have reported to city to save some taxes. I asked
is part of the house "ILLEGAL". They said it is not called illegal but
improper, also said there are quiet a no of people who don't report
their enhancements to their houses which may involve adding a bathroom
or bedroom etc. The risk is whether they have done the proper electic
and plumbing work or not. I asked him how to ensure whether it is done
in a proper way. He told me it is very difficult to find out once it
is done. It may involve tearingup the sheets covering the electric and
plumbing work. He also advised me to ask the seller to put a $10k in
an escrow account which cover up the costs if anything happens in the
next 3 or 5 years. If nothing happens at the end of 3 or 5 years,
seller will get the money back.

Anyways, my realtor brought a market analysis of the houses in this
area (Plymouth, Minnesota) and we came to an amount which we can
offer. We offred the seller 5k more than the average selling price and
also I bear all the minor repairs in the house. The average price is
20k less than the seller's list price. Repairs in the house a One
of the closet door broke may need a replacement, all the sloset doors
are stick to the carpet and are difficult to open and they may need a
half inch cut at the bottom of the doors. Family room doesn't have the
the air intake, hot air comes from the furnace but there is no vent to
take the air from that room. It's a closed room. Back side of the
house some of the vinyl sheets came out of the wall. It needs a fix
and there are many other small things. Those I can do myself. (My
realtor said the total may cost around $3000). 2 days back we bid with
condition-asking the seller to put the money $10k in escrow account.
Seller rejected the bid asking $10k more and didn't like the condition
of keeping the money in escrow account.

That's what happend in the last week.

The house is 1994 built, split level completely finished (2260sft) in
Plymouth, Minnesota. (suburb of Minneapolis)

-Basha