|
house rebuilt year
Hi every one.
I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
Djavdet wrote:
Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet Ask the town bldg dep't if they have any permit info on the house. If the rebuild was done sans permit, the seller would need to have disclosed that fact at least. Jim |
house rebuilt year
"Speedy Jim" wrote in message ...
Djavdet wrote: Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet Ask the town bldg dep't if they have any permit info on the house. If the rebuild was done sans permit, the seller would need to have disclosed that fact at least. If it was disclosed to them. -- Joseph E. Meehan 26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math |
house rebuilt year
The build date and effective year built are two different dates
entirely. Your county tax assessor should have the build date indicated by the original permit pulled by the developer or builder. Like already mentioned your planning and zoning department should have a record of the original build date. No need to panic though. When the dates differ you just need to find our why. In many cases it’s an error or the home has been updated and the work was extensive enough that the county chose an effective year built of 1985 over original date 1969. I think your seller should have advertised 1969 regardless. It could be a good thing, I’ve seen homes that were gutted to the studs and had new wiring, plumbing, sheet-rock, casing, base etc. replaced. If you don’t have any permits pulled in 1980’s then I would worry. Plus make sure that the home doesn’t have aluminum wiring. It would be an anomaly if it did but these are questions to ask. There comes a time in the affairs of man when he must take the bull by the tail and face the situation. -- WCF http://www.utahhousevalues.com |
house rebuilt year
"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message ...
"Speedy Jim" wrote in message ... Djavdet wrote: Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet Ask the town bldg dep't if they have any permit info on the house. If the rebuild was done sans permit, the seller would need to have disclosed that fact at least. If it was disclosed to them. Thanks for the answer, Let's say we found that they had building permit and city knows about ( I think it is so ). I am trying to think how bad this is for us? Would not it be a lie to us and maybe the price of the house should be adjusted? We negotiated the price without knowledge of that rebuilt thing. Or maybe i need to ask this question to lawyer? In general, should not rebuilt house be priced a bit lower then "normal" one? Thanks Djavdet. |
house rebuilt year
|
house rebuilt year
"Djavdet" wrote in message om... "Joseph Meehan" wrote in message ... "Speedy Jim" wrote in message ... Djavdet wrote: Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet Ask the town bldg dep't if they have any permit info on the house. If the rebuild was done sans permit, the seller would need to have disclosed that fact at least. If it was disclosed to them. Thanks for the answer, Let's say we found that they had building permit and city knows about ( I think it is so ). I am trying to think how bad this is for us? Would not it be a lie to us and maybe the price of the house should be adjusted? We negotiated the price without knowledge of that rebuilt thing. Or maybe i need to ask this question to lawyer? In general, should not rebuilt house be priced a bit lower then "normal" one? Thanks Djavdet. yah right! a rebuilt house would be priced "higher" than the original not lower. It sounds like you got a great deal. and BTW the foundation age should have been on the purchase and sales agreement or listings page (before you purchased it). You should check your paper work again. |
house rebuilt year
1- Do you have knowledge that the owner knew it was built earlier?
2- Is there any evidence of the foundation being in poor condition? 3- How did you find out it was built earlier? "Djavdet" wrote in message om... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
Difficult to say. I would not automatically assume the price should be
lower or the value of the house is less. I would suggest a local attorney, after you have done all your homework and have all the facts about building permits etc. It is a lot cheaper for you to do it than the attorney. -- Joseph E. Meehan 26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math "Djavdet" wrote in message om... "Joseph Meehan" wrote in message ... "Speedy Jim" wrote in message ... Djavdet wrote: Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet Ask the town bldg dep't if they have any permit info on the house. If the rebuild was done sans permit, the seller would need to have disclosed that fact at least. If it was disclosed to them. Thanks for the answer, Let's say we found that they had building permit and city knows about ( I think it is so ). I am trying to think how bad this is for us? Would not it be a lie to us and maybe the price of the house should be adjusted? We negotiated the price without knowledge of that rebuilt thing. Or maybe i need to ask this question to lawyer? In general, should not rebuilt house be priced a bit lower then "normal" one? Thanks Djavdet. |
house rebuilt year
Hi Jane,
Please see my answers below, "Jane" wrote in message ... 1- Do you have knowledge that the owner knew it was built earlier? Yes I do, I was told that the seller knew about rebuilt, but her agent did not. I also was told that seller's agent is supposed to pull the records from cityhall. 2- Is there any evidence of the foundation being in poor condition? It looks good enough and our inspector did not notice anything wrong with foundation. 3- How did you find out it was built earlier? Appraiser found inconsistentcy in tax papers and some other docs on the property he also found build permit. I am not sure what docs he found 'cause I've not seen he's report yet. Please ask any questions You want, i need to clearfy this situation ASAP. Thanks Djavdet "Djavdet" wrote in message om... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
Get an expert to evaluate the foundation, ask the seller about the
circumstances, and if you don't like the answers, YOU be the one to decide to tell the seller that they should have disclosed it. Or you can pay somebody to tell you that you can tell the seller the same thing. See what I mean? -B "Djavdet" wrote in message om... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
Hi Andy,
Andy Hill wrote in message . .. Eh, it's not like foundations wear out (at least, not over the timeframes we're dealing with her). Why should it be priced lower? As long as the foundation area was brought up to code (vapor barrier, insulation) at the time of construction, I can't see how it'd matter. I agree and that's why i am asking whether it's worth to escalte the issue or just drop it as pointless. But just looking at the ads in our area, some houses like 2002 "new construction" rebuilt on foundation of '68 cost about 20-30K less. I was wondering why builders would disclose the information about foundation, Is there a law forces them to do so? Now if the reason things were rebuilt was due to a fire, then I'd be a bit more leery -- there'd be the possibility of all kinds of spalling or other weakening if the fire had been severe. I do not know, how would i found it out? I guess there should be some records about it, right? Djavet. |
house rebuilt year
Hi Chucky,
"Chucky" wrote in message yah right! a rebuilt house would be priced "higher" than the original not lower. It sounds like you got a great deal. Before I found out about rebuilt problem , i was thinking it as a good deal. So why do you think it should be priced higher then brand new house? and BTW the foundation age should have been on the purchase and sales agreement or listings page (before you purchased it). You should check your paper work again. It's not in PnS, we agreed on PnS and later on appraiser found the problem. What should I do? Thanks Djavdet. |
house rebuilt year
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 02:35:00 GMT, someone wrote:
Get an expert to evaluate the foundation, ask the seller about the circumstances, This is getting nuts. Why would THIS foundation be any better if the house had NOT been rebuilt. What evidence is there that there is anything WRONG with it. The present house has been there how long???? At this point the Buyer needs to demonstrate that they will suffer some harm from the foundation being older. They need to show they were harmed by not finding this out earlier. Okay so maybe they can get out of the contract if they squawk enough. But to me expecting to continue to buy but get a lower price is a little much. Who knows, maybe the Seller is highly motivated and would make a concession to save the sale. But maybe not. I am not seeing a problem here. There *could* be one under some far-fetched scenario, but what is it besides speculation here. -v. |
house rebuilt year
If the foundation has been around since 1969 and is still in good
condition I'd prefer it over a newer, probably lower quality foundation. Old doesn't always mean bad. RB Djavdet wrote: Hi Jane, Please see my answers below, "Jane" wrote in message ... 1- Do you have knowledge that the owner knew it was built earlier? Yes I do, I was told that the seller knew about rebuilt, but her agent did not. I also was told that seller's agent is supposed to pull the records from cityhall. 2- Is there any evidence of the foundation being in poor condition? It looks good enough and our inspector did not notice anything wrong with foundation. 3- How did you find out it was built earlier? Appraiser found inconsistentcy in tax papers and some other docs on the property he also found build permit. I am not sure what docs he found 'cause I've not seen he's report yet. Please ask any questions You want, i need to clearfy this situation ASAP. Thanks Djavdet "Djavdet" wrote in message .com... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
Hi ,
This is getting nuts. What do you mean nuts?! As I already described all houses in our area are listed lower price and always described as rebuilt if they are rebuilt. And one of the thing I am trying to find out if it is possible to ask the seller step down a little... I bet if he listed the house as rebuilt the price would be lower. Why would THIS foundation be any better if the house had NOT been rebuilt. What evidence is there that there is anything WRONG with it. The present house has been there how long???? Well, it's suspicios at the least, why the seller did not desclose it and even more suspicion why the house was rebuilt that early. At this point the Buyer needs to demonstrate that they will suffer some harm from the foundation being older. They need to show they were harmed by not finding this out earlier. That's true, if the seller demonstrates that the house is clean of any problems and simply happened to be rebuilt on a bit older foundation yes I would not have any problems to buy it. Okay so maybe they can get out of the contract if they squawk enough. But to me expecting to continue to buy but get a lower price is a little much. Who knows, maybe the Seller is highly motivated and would make a concession to save the sale. But maybe not. I still like the house, and if the seller shows all documents supporting he's words I'll buy the house, but from my experience, if people are hiding something at the first place, very offten they keep lieing to you to the end. I am just trying to avoid bigger problem if there is any.... I am not seeing a problem here. There *could* be one under some far-fetched scenario, but what is it besides speculation here. Thanks for sharing your opinion anyway, it is always good to have more then one head :-) Djavdet. |
house rebuilt year
"Djavdet" wrote in message m... Hi Chucky, "Chucky" wrote in message yah right! a rebuilt house would be priced "higher" than the original not lower. It sounds like you got a great deal. Before I found out about rebuilt problem , i was thinking it as a good deal. So why do you think it should be priced higher then brand new house? and BTW the foundation age should have been on the purchase and sales agreement or listings page (before you purchased it). You should check your paper work again. It's not in PnS, we agreed on PnS and later on appraiser found the problem. What should I do? Thanks Djavdet. Get an attorney! Unfortunately I learned the hard way. Never purchase a home without an attorney. Brigitte |
house rebuilt year
I think the point is that if you have knowledge
before the close of escrow, you can't complain later about lack of disclosure. You may have grounds to back out of the deal and can use that to renegoitate a better price. Or don't buy the house. Buyer's remorse is common. But in this case, you can't blame the seller/seller's agent. --Remove -NOSPAM- to contact me. |
house rebuilt year
On 7 Feb 2004 19:45:33 -0800, someone wrote:
.... if the seller shows all documents supporting he's words.... And what kind of documents would those be????? What are his words? His words are that it was rebuilt many years ago. So he comes up with a document that confirms that it was? If *you* are claiming there is a problem, then where are *your* docunents supporting your words? You apparently want him to "prove" there is NOT a problem. But instead, can you PROVE that there *is*??? If you can't, why should he lower the price??? -v. |
house rebuilt year
RB writes:
If the foundation has been around since 1969 and is still in good condition I'd prefer it over a newer, probably lower quality foundation. Old doesn't always mean bad. Up here in Minnesota, I'd say a lot of the new basements are better than the old. Many of them are now poured concrete instead of blocks. The waterproofing seems to be better now. More drain tiling is required. I'll have to say I have seen a few new homes with some pretty shoddy block work, but that seems to be the exception, not the norm. Brian Elfert |
house rebuilt year
|
house rebuilt year
"Djavdet" wrote in message om... (v) wrote in message ... On 7 Feb 2004 19:45:33 -0800, someone wrote: (snip) Well, yeah you're right, couple of things 1. it is his property and he did not disclose rebuilt thing. It is my turn to suspect him now. 2. If there is no document proving the rebuilt, there could be a case when the house was not rebuilt entirely but say remodelled. Again non of this was disclosed why should I beleive on his words? Djavdet. IMHO, time to walk away from the deal. The house is probably fine, but you obviously now have doubts about the house, and don't trust the seller. You will get upset every time you go in the basement and see the 'old' walls. Get out, if you still can, and buy something else. You'll be happier, seller will be happier. aem sends.... |
house rebuilt year
I do not know, when you send your car to bodyshop and they perform
some reparings they give you full description of what has been done right? And if you bought my car, I am under NO obligation to show you those papers. I can if I want, and you are free not to agree to buy i I don't. And unless I falsely say there was never any work, I am not obligated to tell you that there was. And if you agree to buy without me saying, then you cannot later add a requirement that I prove anything. And the body shop peperwork states so many labor hours and which parts, it would not say how or why the damage occured in the first place. You have already found out the house was rebuilt. What more would the paperwork prove but what you already know. The laws about whether there is an affirmative duty to disclose a DEFECT in a house vary widely by state. But I wouldn't think they apply here anyway, since being rebuilt is not a "defect". BTW, have you ASKED the owner why it was rebuilt (was he even the one who rebuilt it) and what did he say? Why the same situation with the house should be any different? Because it is a house which is real estate and not a car which is a motor vehicle? Why should that make a difference? Well, *why* do you get a license plate and a "pink slip" for your car and not your house, why is a house "deed" "recorded" at the Registry of Deeds and the car "title" "registered" at the Dept. of Motor Vehicles, why are they taxed differently, why are the warrantees different, one is built in a factory and shipped to a dealer and is personal property, one is built or assembled onsite and is real property etc etc A HOUSE IS NOT A CAR. There could be a fire, they painted foundation and i do not see affected parts of it. How's that? Prove there was a fire. And what if there was? Why is that a problem? What Effect did the fire have on the foundation? Assume ALL of the foundation was "Effected". In what way was it Effected? Suppose it was not painted, what would you see that was bad, that could be covered up with just paint? Prove the bad effect. 2. If there is no document proving the rebuilt, there could be a case when the house was not rebuilt entirely but say remodelled. Right. And so he has a "document" that PROVES he paid $X to have it rebuilt -or- remodeled. So what? Thatr only proves what you already know, that it was rebuilt (or remodelled). So what? And what if it WAS remodelled. So what. Wait a minute, isn't that BETTER from your point of view, since you are worried what was so bad that it had to be rebuilt? So what is wrong if it was "only" remodelled? Houses (UNlike cars) do NOT sell by model year, they sell by CONDITION. Which is determined by the buyer looking at it. So you looked at it. What is wrong with it? Suppose he has no document proving it was remodelled or rebuilt - then what does that mean? That it was not? Which is what you want! Again non of this was disclosed why should I beleive on his words? Djavdet. Because you are LOOKING at the house. Do you like what you see or not? Then what does it matter. I think you had better not buy this house. Let someone else buy it who will appreciate it. You would be better off with a different house. This is only a problem for you. -v. |
house rebuilt year
|
house rebuilt year
On 11 Feb 2004 00:46:20 -0800, someone wrote:
As far as I know seller has to disclose certain information about the house. I am not sure though whether it is a law or not. Well, if you are saying he is doing something illegal, you'd better know what that law is that you say he is breaking. But in the end what does it matter. Suppose he broke the law, are you going to try to balckmail him with it, or do you still want the house? WHAT DO YOU ACTUALLY WANT???? The fact is, the house was listed as 20 yo but appeared as 65 yo. and there is no proving paper saying that it is 20 yo. There is no paper saying it is 65 either. Again, WHAT DO YOU WANT. If you even *think* it is a 65 y.o. house and you instead want a 20 y.o. house, you should not buy it no matter what any paper says. Suppose he *refuses* to "prove" it is 20 y.o., what will you do then???? WHAT DO YOU WANT??? BTW, have you ASKED the owner why it was rebuilt (was he even the one who rebuilt it) and what did he say? Here is another problem we communicate through agents it slows down everything. No i did not ask him that question, i am waiting for appraisal and builing permit. Then you are an idiot, if this is your big question that controls whether you want the house or not, yet you have not even asked, even through agents? Why are you speculating out here, until you find out what he says? How can you say he is lying if he has not even been asked the question yet? I think it's bs. no matter how you call the product if you sell it you have to advertise it correctly or get it back. you can not advertise one quality and sell different. So do you want the house or not, WHAT DO YOU WANT, *KNOWING* what you know? Well, i think it's quite easy to prove there was fire. Should be in records somewhere. Then prove there was. Do you want the Seller to prove there WAS or WAS NOT a fire? WHich do you want? disclose such an information, why many builders list houses and always say that the house was rebuilt in year 2003 and because of fire? According to you they do not have to do it, so should not they get more money though? Your English has slipped so badly I do not know what you mean. I don't hold bad English against you entirely, in that if I tried to post in Hindu or Farsi then I wouldn't do any better, but then I am not buying a house in India or Iran.... There is not a specific price one gets for a 2003 house or for a 1968 house, it is by condition, you inspect the house for yourself and offer what you think it is worth to you, there is no list of prices. We wanted to buy the house because we did not see anything wrong with it, it does not mean the house's ok. When you see AIDS infected person You probably won't notice anything wrong .... You would know if you got that person tested. This is a house. What would you like it tested for? Apparently it looks just like a 20 y.o. house. What hidden things do you think it has, and test for those. It is a house not a person or a car. How long do houses stand where you are from (which is apparently not here from your English). Why would you not buy a house with a 64 y.o. foundation if it is indistinguishable from a 20 y.o. house. But never mind all that, you have become tiresome & boring, I will ask yet again WHAT DO YOU WANT? Do you want it proved that there was, or was not, a fire? What would you do differently if it was one answer or the other? Do you want it proved that it was or was not rebuilt? What would you do differently one way or the other? That it was or was not remodelled? What would you do differently one way or the other? Suppose the Seller did break the law, so what, you have discovered his lie, you did not rely upon it, now that you know the truth, what will you do? What is the worst truth there could be? Which is worse, was or was not remodelled, was or was not rebuilt, was or was not a fire? Suppose all is the worst, what will you do? WHAT DO YOU WANT? -v. |
house rebuilt year
With the money you have on the table, it is time to discuss your
concerns with your lawyer. That what you paying him for. As a sanity check, in my town houses are torn down regularly with the foundations being reuse. Why? In my town, if you keep the orginal foundation it is consider a remodeling job for permit purposes. The resulting houses sell for 700K-1.5 million. I don't think the 100 year old foundation is hurting the price. But ever town is different. Also, in my state, you have to declare known defects. I doubt a old foundation in sound condition is considered a defect. If you are really worried and still want the house, have it check out by a structure engineer. If you want out of your contract, it could be a reason. If you are just trying to get a lower price, you can try but you also run the risk of the seller walking away. (Djavdet) wrote in message . com... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
Walk away. You'll never be happy...you'll always be suspicious, you'll
always feel screwed over. Why bother. Is this the only house for sale in the area where you live? Why are you pursuing it? Go buy another house. The age of the house is meaningless. Where I live there are plenty of 100 year old houses that sell for over a million dollars while new houses sell for 500 to 800K. Age has nothing to do with anything. Get a competent building inspector if you must have this house and only this house out of all the houses in the universe. The inspector can pretty much figure out what was changed. You sound like a person who thrives on aggravation and drama. "Philip" wrote in message om... With the money you have on the table, it is time to discuss your concerns with your lawyer. That what you paying him for. As a sanity check, in my town houses are torn down regularly with the foundations being reuse. Why? In my town, if you keep the orginal foundation it is consider a remodeling job for permit purposes. The resulting houses sell for 700K-1.5 million. I don't think the 100 year old foundation is hurting the price. But ever town is different. Also, in my state, you have to declare known defects. I doubt a old foundation in sound condition is considered a defect. If you are really worried and still want the house, have it check out by a structure engineer. If you want out of your contract, it could be a reason. If you are just trying to get a lower price, you can try but you also run the risk of the seller walking away. (Djavdet) wrote in message . com... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
house rebuilt year
we had a similar issue...the house listed as 1978, but all windows labelled
as 1984. Furnace is 1984 too...during the requisite lawyer signings, I noticed something...the home was listed as 1978, but original permits were in 1969!! Turns out that there was another house here, and a bunch of stuff happened "in between" sans permit. local neighbours confirm that a much smaller house "used to be here", and to avoid complication, a single part of the foundation was left original and built "around" to avoid needing permits....apparently it was possible back then! I had an appraiser cornered and ran this by him...he agreed to take a look at the house quickly (family friend) and let me know.... he didn't even get inside the house and told me it was worth every penny and more of what I paid, no matter the age. Local neighborhood, quality, etc were all too high to even think of starting litigation to get back some money.... I guess being surrounded by $300K homes does well, doesn't it?? :) If the house is "the one", and its right in every other way...have it thoroughly inspected and looked over. if its got a clean bill of health, who cares? I know I don't... b "art" wrote in message ... Walk away. You'll never be happy...you'll always be suspicious, you'll always feel screwed over. Why bother. Is this the only house for sale in the area where you live? Why are you pursuing it? Go buy another house. The age of the house is meaningless. Where I live there are plenty of 100 year old houses that sell for over a million dollars while new houses sell for 500 to 800K. Age has nothing to do with anything. Get a competent building inspector if you must have this house and only this house out of all the houses in the universe. The inspector can pretty much figure out what was changed. You sound like a person who thrives on aggravation and drama. "Philip" wrote in message om... With the money you have on the table, it is time to discuss your concerns with your lawyer. That what you paying him for. As a sanity check, in my town houses are torn down regularly with the foundations being reuse. Why? In my town, if you keep the orginal foundation it is consider a remodeling job for permit purposes. The resulting houses sell for 700K-1.5 million. I don't think the 100 year old foundation is hurting the price. But ever town is different. Also, in my state, you have to declare known defects. I doubt a old foundation in sound condition is considered a defect. If you are really worried and still want the house, have it check out by a structure engineer. If you want out of your contract, it could be a reason. If you are just trying to get a lower price, you can try but you also run the risk of the seller walking away. (Djavdet) wrote in message . com... Hi every one. I have a question, We are trying to buy a house and everything was good enough so far but recently we found that house has an older foundation then structure itself. Seller did not disclose that fact and listed the house as '85 but foundation is older , like '69. So does anybody know whether the seller is supposed to disclose such information and what's gonna happen if he did not? I mean , should we be warried about it or just forget it? Yeah everything is happening in NH Please advise Thanks Djavdet |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:02 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter