In Texas it associates with the house, it has to be disclosed if
something happened in the house; otherwise, nothing needs be said.
--JC
On 6/3/16 7:20 PM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:
No such thing as “good realtor”. While we can exclude your spouse, realtors
rank right up with puffy shirt used car sales guys. Same MO, different product.
I don’t believe any realtor worth their salt would have disclosed it if they
weren’t required to by law. If they had issues with it, they wouldn’t have
shown the house to begin with.
This brings up an interesting subject - disclosure of stuff like this varies
from state to state. It’s called “stigmatized property”. California is the
only state that I know of that expressly requires disclosure of deaths or
violent acts.
Dan
According to the NAR’s Code of Ethics, real estate agents are obligated to
discover and disclose adverse factors reasonably apparent in the properties
they deal with. Once an agent discovers, or should have discovered, an adverse
condition, she must disclose it to the buyer. With the courts increasingly
holding stigma-type defects to the same disclosure standards as physical
defects, the safest judgment call in every state is to disclose.
On Jun 3, 2016, at 6:58 PM, Kaleb C. Striplin via Mercedes
<mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
A good realtor would have told you that and put you into another house if it
bothered you.
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
--
--BB
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
