The REAL ESTATE ANSWER I GOT
 

For anyone following my post, the latest is the R.E. AGENT called me to tell me they figured it out and NOT to worry. It was a broken water sprinkler head. I asked who determined that? He said irrigation guy. He said it's fixed and all dry now. How do I know for sure. I'm under so much pressure. Husband going for brain surgery Monday. Deadline almost up. What do I do??? Attorney will charge a fortune.

Tell them a verbal from an "irrigation guy" was not part of your contract. A licensed home inspector IS. If you can't show me a clear report from a licensed home inspector, Deal is off!

If the home inspector returns and sees no issues, you will know with certainty the problem has been fixed. The cost will ONLY be for a second inspection. Attorney fees will be much more.

If the agent refuses, you have the right to call the inspector and have him check the fix. Again, cost will only be for a second inspection.

Do not recall, have you hired a home inspection company to inspect the house. If so go to them if not, seriously consider hiring one.

Hope all goes well with husband surgery

Yes. He found water damage

I would just call the inspector see what he finds? Then go from there?


Wouldn’t the neighbor be responsible for any damage? IMO this most stupidest thing developer did put popups under the roof overhang house of next door property owner house. IMO that 1 foot are is for drainage and should be nothing in it including irrigation up against neighbors house. If I had those in my yard (which I don’t corner lot) I would remove popups and cap them off relieve me of any responsibility of damaging neighbors property.

This orbit popup will fail due to white bushing deteriorating and cracking. IMO wise to remove and at least replace with different design.

This is such a tenuous solution and you are under such pressure. I, personally, would NOT close on this property.

If they allow a clause on the sale contract that the seller will be financially responsible for any continuing water difficulties in that area or knock $5,000. off the price, maybe... There is a reason the seller wants out, IMHO.

I wouldn't go through with the closing. You should be able to get an attorney to send a letter to the broker and the escrow company demanding that the sales contract be cancelled. A simple letter shouldn't cost a fortune. The earnest money is in escrow and it does not belong to the broker. It should not be used as a ransom.

Call D’Angelo - he did my home inspection and you can completely rely on him. One time I called them about a water leak in the garage, he asked me to describe it. And he told me, over the phone, it was the irrigation. When we changed the nozzle, the problem was solved. D’Angelo didn’t charge a penny for his help.

I agree with not closing on the house. But, the title company would never allow a contingency clause like that at the closing.

Don’t pay the title company UNTIL your terms are met. My agent would not give me the keys to the house no matter how many times I asked because she wanted to be the property manager when I was away as a snowflake. I wrote on the title document that I did not receive the keys and can’t get into the house and therefore, can’t pay for this. The title company called me as I was 2000 miles away and said it wasn’t their concern. But they let the broker know and the keys were delivered to my northern address. Then I paid the title company.

You contact an attorney - the same advice you’ve been receiving for about a week. It won’t be a fortune for help on this issue. RvR on spending a few hundred on an attorney v the cost of settling in this house is significant.
Do NOT accept the word if agent, contact attorney NOW.

I wouldn’t. An attorney can’t fix the leak or tell where it’s from, or what else might be wrong with the house, but they can sure charge!

Most likely not but it would give them some ground to stand on for not closing. The current owner cannot guarantee this won't be an ongoing or increasing problem at this point.

It would depend on the wording of your sales agreement, did it say, you bought the house in “as is” condition, or that all things work based on the findings of your home inspector? If the first case, then you have to go along with the closing. I assume it is not a new house. That would be under warranty. It’s worth looking into this because it may effect your house insurance premium, or even if you get one.

Wouldn’t the original home inspector just go back and check out the repair? Can’t the seller provide the quote and invoice for the repair. This seems very simple. Apart from that you would look at it during your final walkthrough. If they found an issue and corrected it then this could all be fine. There isn’t always some nefarious intent.

I just read your original post again. If you hired a professional home inspector per your real estate purchase agreement, and he/she found water damage (that you already said you want no part of), and has documented that in his/her written report, this transaction is done. Absolutely no way you should proceed with the purchase.
In my opinion, you should in writing notify the broker holding your deposit in their escrow account along with a copy of the inspection report, that you are NOT proceeding with the sale, and you want your good faith deposit returned with x number if days. When that time frame expires, if you have not received your funds back, seek out and consult with an independent attorney specializing in real estate law.
This should be a cut and dried situation detailed in your purchase agreement. IMO, the broker and agent(s) know this. Good luck to you and husband, and keep in mind there will be other properties for sale in the future.

Perhaps not, but wouldn't the current owner have noticed a wet closet floor? Why buy a home with unresolved issues when the purchaser has so much on her plate now and a short time until closing? It doesn't make sense to me to risk that much when it's not necessary.

Yes, but…
My agent recommended the home inspector who I found out later, even though I would have paid, was working for her, not me. I used D’Angelo who worked for me. I knew I was working with someone unethical (agent), but I used to be in real estate myself for a short while.

I would normally avoid a lawyer like the plague, but not in this case. The broker is licensed by the state and must follow the state's laws of ethics. That means that they have a fiduciary duty to both the buyer and the seller, even if they don't legally represent them. This broker knows that the buyer doesn't want to buy the house, that there is good reason to be concerned about future mold or other consequences related to a water leak, and that the buyer's husband has a serious illness. Yet, the broker is misrepresenting the status of the earnest money that is in escrow so that they can unload an unwanted house to get a commission. The broker cannot legally take the earnest money, but they are telling the buyer that they can as a scare tactic. Outrageous. The OP needs an attorney.

The repair was done by neighbor why should seller be responsible for neighbor that damaged his house?

Well, your advice is invariably great. I defer.

Agree completely. Simply get the home inspector to go back. The inspector will not lie or coverup a problem that has not been repaired to standards.. He is a licensed professional. Home will not close until the buyer is satisfied with the final walkthrough. The Agent is just wasting time for no reason. Home inspector is the right solution.

How do you know an attorney will cost a fortune? Moreover, what will cost more, an attorney or repairing a potential water issue in a house? What will cost more, an attorney or the cost of a failing house? How much does the house cost? How much does an attorney cost? Have you consulted any lawyer about his or her pricing?

To me it sounds like you just have never dealt with an attorney and know nothing about the pricing of an attorney's services!

That check shouldn’t be cashed till closing day IMO. Otherwise IMO it’s stealing.

Hook Set
 

The hook is set, the real estate agent and the seller who hired him in no way wants you to get off the line. This sounds like a very dangerous situation financially.

No idea why the owner didn’t notice. But why buy the home? Because they signed a contract to buy the home and allowing for repairs of inspection issues. Imagine you are the seller. A new issue arises just before inspection. You didn’t know about it and you are moving to a home you purchased. You need to sell your home to buy your new home. Everything seems fine but then there is a repair needed. You make the repair and fulfill your obligation under the purchase ageeement. Then the buyer gets cold feet and backs out. You did everything right and now you are screwed.

I’m sorry but people need to understand their contract and follow them. There are 2 sides to every story. In this case the buyer should be provided proof of repair and the. They should buy the house as agreed. Of course if the seller won’t supply documentation of repair then I’m on the buyer’s side.

I seem to have missed that part. But the seller does have to show that it was repaired properly. I’m sure the neighbor would provide that info.

By hook is set you mean the purchase and sale agreement is signed. By not wanting to let them off the line you mean not want the buyer to break a contract they signed. By the way the seller could be on the hook for their deposit on another purchase if their buyer backs out.

That is why the buyer needs to hire her own home inspector to make sure that everything is fine and then they go ahead. If everything is fine ACCORDING TO HER OWN INSPECTOR, then she should go ahead with the contract. I would never trust an inspector suggested by the seller or agent, I don’t care what certification they have.

What about the escrow company? In a typical real estate sales contract, the earnest money is held by a third party in an escrow account that does not belong to either the buyer or the seller. The earnest money is rarely ever forfeited because the purpose of it is to demonstrate that the buyer is serious about buying the house, not to be used as a threat or penalty against the buyer to force a sale. But, the broker has told the buyer that they will automatically forfeit the money if they don't complete the sale. Totally not true. What is wrong with the buyer asking an attorney to review the contract, explain their rights, and ask the escrow company to refund the earnest money? The escrow company is the decider here, not the broker. It sounds like this broker has not treated the buyer ethically or in a fair and fiduciary manner, as required by law.

Just did. He's to busy. I can't even find a RE ATTORNEY

Call McLin Burnsed, 352-753-4690.

The buyer should consult an attorney if they aren’t clear on the contract. I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think the escrow company is a decision maker. They are just holding the money. At some point a decision has to be made to release it or not. If no agreement it would have to go to court. The escrow company can’t decide who is right.

You are correct that it is very rare for a seller to keep the deposit. There’s always some loophole and even if no loophole it’s difficult to keep the money. That being said the deposit is to prove the buyer is serious. But if the buyer doesn’t risk losing it then it’s meaningless. It sounds to me that the seller did what was required and the buyer should not be backing out. There could be details missing and assumptions I’m making based only on what I’ve read in the threads.

Everything you said is correct, except that the buyer should complete the sale. There is no indication that the buyer was not serious about the house until the inspection revealed water damage. But, the broker is trying to convince the buyer that they, the broker, can decide to keep the earnest money, which is totally wrong. That is why the buyer needs an attorney to even the playing field. In my opinion, the broker will not want to go to court on this issue.

Well owner may not be living in house or in area. IMO it’s all neighbors fault for not maintaining irrigation and not noticing the gusher flooding neighbors house whether it just happens or not. IMO the neighbor responsible regardless what happens between seller and buyer.

This should be wake up call to use than live in CYVs. Make sure irrigation in top notch shape up against neighbors house or cap it off. If I was owner I’d be going after neighbor being they caused damage.

This isn't a simple, "the dryer vent was loose", type issue. Water seepage into a home is a huge issue and the only side to this story is there's no guarantee the fix is for the issue without time. She doesn't have this and her husband is ill. That's the seller's problem to iron out completely, not an unsuspecting buyer.

I totally agree. I would also add that it is a legitimate reason to cancel the sales contract. The seller failed to disclose the water damage, which was visible, even if she didn't know about it. The licensed broker has a duty to treat the buyer fairly, and to not take advantage of them. That is their duty as a licensed professional.

I’ll disagree with you folks with just the caveat that we don’t know everything. It should be easy to ascertain if the problem was fixed correctly. It should be easy to ascertain if the contract allowed the seller to fix the issue. If the contract said the seller could fix issues unless they were serious or major, well okay, back out. But what if this was a newly sprung irrigation leak, quickly fixed and no longer an issue? No reason for the buyer to back out.

Any of us could be correct and the OP needs to do their due diligence to determine if this issue was properly addressed.

I’ve seen similar instance in the past where a seller fixed a pipe. The buyer, being a flipper with construction experience didn’t feel the fix was adequate. He backed out but it was a long battle and nightmare.

And if the cause of the leak is the neighbors sprinkler, who is to say that it won't happen again once the house is sold. Why buy a problem when they are ill-equipped to deal with that issue and the seller needs to straighten it out prior to listing again.

If I were in the OP's shoes I would have found and gone to a well respected local real estate attorney within minutes of being told I could not get my deposit returned. I would have taken all my paperwork as the attorney could not help me without having and examining it. The attorney would have listened to my story, read through the relevant contract(s) and any other documents that may have pertained to the matter and consequently have taken action - or not if nothing could be done - which I doubt. A letter or even a short phone call to the broker/agent from the attorney probably costing $200 - $500 would likely have resulted in a timely refund of the deposit.

If there was any doubt of my deposit being refunded I would have obtained an inspection from an independent inspector paid by me and not affiliated with or suggested by the broker. The inspector would have been one highly experienced with homes in The Villages. This would have provided me in detail with the damage to the property, mold issues and so on.

IMHO with your husband experiencing the medical issues you have reported in your posts the last thing either one of you needs is the stress from trying to handle this on your own if you feel unqualified to do so.

Best wishes for your husband's health and a positive end to this matter for you!