Hidden mold growth scares the shit out of me. Luckily you can look for the telltale signs of it, and the conditions that would foster it. The other alternative is a mold test during home inspection, and there are people lining up to scam you in that department.
The thing that I'm wondering about now is the possibility of mold in the walls.
So, the attic was improperly vented (despite the roof being redone 2.5 years ago). That was the main issue. Ridge vent was completely improperly installed, insulation was installed upside-down (creating an additional vapor barrier that resulted in saturated insulation), and the soffit vents are completely blocked. There are two small but totally inadequate gable vents. On top of that, the flashing around the chimney is allowing water in.
So the attic literally just holds humidity and has no way to vent it. Water is even getting in down the chimney.
As I said, the roof is new. 2.5 years. They ripped out 70% of the old plywood. The stuff they left behind is covered with mold, and there's new mold growth on the new wood. So this is an active problem.
Funny enough, there was nothing about mold on the disclosure statement.
So what happens if that runs down into the studs in the interior of the house? Insulation holding moisture against the attic floor could create a path for water to travel elsewhere.
And that's not a thing you can really look for unless you take walls down.
What I never understand is how people get to this point in trying to sell their house with problems like this being present. They're either amazingly ignorant, or they're trying to rip you off.
People only think about these sorts of things when buying and selling houses. They don't think about them at all for the 10-30 years they spend living in the house. When it comes time to sell, whoah! Look at the toll nature has taken on this pile of wood I live in. How did I not notice?
So what happens if that runs down into the studs in the interior of the house?
You tear the house down and rebuild it.
That was more a rhetorical question. I know where that all leads.
Yeah, I'm not sure how to approach this. They hammered on the new roof as a selling point. So did this guy just not know what they did? Or did he know and falsify information on the disclosure? Was the work not inspected after it was done? And why would you leave behind sheathing with obvious mold on it?
Part of me wonders if this was some self-work as opposed to properly contracted work.
Having spent a year or two looking at houses, it really changes the way you look at a place when you go to a friends house, I now walk in and look in the corners on the ceiling and floors for water damage. I pretty much see every imperfection in other people's houses... Totally blind to my houses issues :-p
So what happens if that runs down into the studs in the interior of the house?
You tear the house down and rebuild it.
That was more a rhetorical question. I know where that all leads.
Yeah, I'm not sure how to approach this. They hammered on the new roof as a selling point. So did this guy just not know what they did? Or did he know and falsify information on the disclosure? Was the work not inspected after it was done? And why would you leave behind sheathing with obvious mold on it?
Part of me wonders if this was some self-work as opposed to properly contracted work.
I would make several non-negotiable demands.
1. Further more thorough inspection at their expense. 2. They commit to full, certified redress of all of these issues contractually. 3. They bear all costs. 4. They disclose now and further items they may not have disclosed before...
I think my building has too much negative pressure. If I open even one window partway, you can hear a very strong howling noise in the hallway. I think it's all getting sucked up the elevator shaft/stairwell. I opened all of my windows the other day, and there was relatively strong resistance when trying to open my front door.
So what happens if that runs down into the studs in the interior of the house?
You tear the house down and rebuild it.
That was more a rhetorical question. I know where that all leads.
Yeah, I'm not sure how to approach this. They hammered on the new roof as a selling point. So did this guy just not know what they did? Or did he know and falsify information on the disclosure? Was the work not inspected after it was done? And why would you leave behind sheathing with obvious mold on it?
Part of me wonders if this was some self-work as opposed to properly contracted work.
I would make several non-negotiable demands.
1. Further more thorough inspection at their expense. 2. They commit to full, certified redress of all of these issues contractually. 3. They bear all costs. 4. They disclose now and further items they may not have disclosed before...
2 and 3 are already required both contractually and by New York law. They have literally no choice but to address the major items before selling this house.
I'm not actually sure if the law requires that they bear the entire cost, but our mortgage company will not approve the sale until the work is done, guaranteed.
1 is moot because the nature of the abatement requires a re-inspection. Whether they foot it or I do is immaterial - it's like a $135 fee. A wall inspection is going on the list for sure.
4 is useless because, well, if they already tried to cover something up, what makes you think they'll disclose now? Between all the sets of eyes on the house, I believe we've found everything that is of concern.
I mean, good. Pest damage, radon, mold, and a failed septic? The house is literally currently unfit for human habitation.
4. They disclose now and further items they may not have disclosed before...
4 is useless because, well, if they already tried to cover something up, what makes you think they'll disclose now? Between all the sets of eyes on the house, I believe we've found everything that is of concern.
It can be in the seller's interest to not bother investigating what's in the house because then they'd have to disclose it. If a buyer wants to buy it without knowing about radon and mold, and if the buyer doesn't do due diligence to investigate before the purchase, then the seller just got out of fixing it.
For example, houses built in a certain date range (at least, in the greater Boston area) probably have lead paint. No one actually tests for lead paint because then they'd have to disclose it, forever. Instead, both parties acknowledge that there's probably lead paint and proceed with the sale.
Well, I'd bring up four, and I'd lower my offer. If I were you, I'd be preparing to walk away, and use that attitude in all future negotiation.
Like, take 20k off the offer on top of the repair costs they have to shoulder.
If they make good on the repairs, and the inspections are fine, and there's no further mold in the house, there is literally no reason for me to do this except for "fuck you." If I'm going to do that, I'll just save everyone the hassle and walk away, since everything on this list is "walk away without penalty" territory.
I already talked them down anticipating having to do some small work around the house. That was a good-faith negotiation. To relent now is, well, not good-faith.
When I say that 4 is moot, what I mean is that I've already done inspections and uncovered things. We're going to have more inspections to see how the work went. There's honestly nothing left to disclose, because we literally looked at all of it. The inspection report is 50 pages of "here's the shit that's wrong."
And because we uncovered the mold and other issues, they would be required to disclose that information forever going forward.
Further inspection by the seller is, essentially, unreliable. They're either ignorant or lying, and that won't change just because it's in a contract. So I'm already not going to believe anything else they disclose and trust only my own inspectors for that.
Those kinds of repairs are not quick. Are you willing to wait until they're all addressed? Do you trust the seller to remain financially solvent to complete the work? What if the repairs cost $40k instead of $20?
That extent of damage is nearing the threshold where an insurance company would tear it down and cash you out.
Those kinds of repairs are not quick. Are you willing to wait until they're all addressed? Do you trust the seller to remain financially solvent to complete the work? What if the repairs cost $40k instead of $20?
That extent of damage is nearing the threshold where an insurance company would tear it down and cash you out.
Yup, those are all serious considerations, and I can't make any decisions until the sellers respond. This is all stuff I'm holding in my head right now.
I mean, right, if someone hands you a stack of papers and says "I'd love to buy your house, but first cough up $25k right the fuck now to fix problems," would you be able to do it? I can't even imagine how you begin to finance things like that.
Add to this that we talked the seller down below their offer floor, and this is a recipe for someone walking away.
Nuri and I both agree that if they can do things in a timely manner, we'll go forward. Otherwise, we walk away, take a month off, and start again. We're willing to go forward because everything can be easily fixed - it's just money. It's all just a bucket of money you throw at the house and things work again.
It's a bit of a clusterfuck, no lie, but these are the known hurdles in buying a house. I'm really just impressed that it failed all four major categories of inspection that allow you to get out of a contract.
It's actually very refreshing. This is an issue that we know unequivocally how to deal with.
Sellers, you fix all of it, at your expense, to code, and you have all of the work scheduled to start by the end of May at the latest, or goodbye.
It's just a house. It's not even the only house under consideration that has a double oven. We're willing to wait a few months -- that's actually advantageous to us. But our lease is up at the end of October, and that's my hard line.
Toxic house relationships are the worst. The Bank will pretty much enforce your financial relationship forever and it's hard to give it up without losing a bunch of money.
And then there is the mold growing in strange places and the strange parasites :-p
Yeah, for all the bullshit, we are actually in the strongest possible negotiating position. Really, there is no negotiating - we dictate what we want, and if they don't like it, we just walk. If they want to sell the house to someone else, they'll still need the work done.
Now, if I were the seller, and also an asshole, I'd walk away, take the house off the market, do cheap and/or sub-standard repairs that would pass a casual inspection, and re-list in a year at a higher asking price.
Except we know they *just* moved someone into that house who is on oxygen. We don't know why they're moving, but it's looking to me like they need a bigger space to accommodate a parent moving in.
Possibly. On the other hand, I could also see them not having the extra money kicking around, because they're taking care of someone. And if it's an elderly or infirm person, moving them repeatedly may not be in their best interest.
Lots of variables. We shall see. Attorney is drafting the letter right now.
I just had, quite possibly, the best shower ever. Great pressure, easy temperature control, two heads (big round fixed head plus a normal shower head on a hose), just the right size cubicle, a perfectly waterproof door, heated floor to step on when leaving the shower...
The best part, this shower is the one in my new apartment!
Comments
So, the attic was improperly vented (despite the roof being redone 2.5 years ago). That was the main issue. Ridge vent was completely improperly installed, insulation was installed upside-down (creating an additional vapor barrier that resulted in saturated insulation), and the soffit vents are completely blocked. There are two small but totally inadequate gable vents. On top of that, the flashing around the chimney is allowing water in.
So the attic literally just holds humidity and has no way to vent it. Water is even getting in down the chimney.
As I said, the roof is new. 2.5 years. They ripped out 70% of the old plywood. The stuff they left behind is covered with mold, and there's new mold growth on the new wood. So this is an active problem.
Funny enough, there was nothing about mold on the disclosure statement.
So what happens if that runs down into the studs in the interior of the house? Insulation holding moisture against the attic floor could create a path for water to travel elsewhere.
And that's not a thing you can really look for unless you take walls down.
Yeah, I'm not sure how to approach this. They hammered on the new roof as a selling point. So did this guy just not know what they did? Or did he know and falsify information on the disclosure? Was the work not inspected after it was done? And why would you leave behind sheathing with obvious mold on it?
Part of me wonders if this was some self-work as opposed to properly contracted work.
Also, negative pressure living space, so fresh air is drawn through and smells exhaust uniformly out the doors/bathrooms.
Aaaaahhhhh, modern HVAC.
1. Further more thorough inspection at their expense.
2. They commit to full, certified redress of all of these issues contractually.
3. They bear all costs.
4. They disclose now and further items they may not have disclosed before...
I'm not actually sure if the law requires that they bear the entire cost, but our mortgage company will not approve the sale until the work is done, guaranteed.
1 is moot because the nature of the abatement requires a re-inspection. Whether they foot it or I do is immaterial - it's like a $135 fee. A wall inspection is going on the list for sure.
4 is useless because, well, if they already tried to cover something up, what makes you think they'll disclose now? Between all the sets of eyes on the house, I believe we've found everything that is of concern.
I mean, good. Pest damage, radon, mold, and a failed septic? The house is literally currently unfit for human habitation.
We actually just did these people a favor.
Like, take 20k off the offer on top of the repair costs they have to shoulder.
For example, houses built in a certain date range (at least, in the greater Boston area) probably have lead paint. No one actually tests for lead paint because then they'd have to disclose it, forever. Instead, both parties acknowledge that there's probably lead paint and proceed with the sale.
I already talked them down anticipating having to do some small work around the house. That was a good-faith negotiation. To relent now is, well, not good-faith.
When I say that 4 is moot, what I mean is that I've already done inspections and uncovered things. We're going to have more inspections to see how the work went. There's honestly nothing left to disclose, because we literally looked at all of it. The inspection report is 50 pages of "here's the shit that's wrong."
And because we uncovered the mold and other issues, they would be required to disclose that information forever going forward.
Further inspection by the seller is, essentially, unreliable. They're either ignorant or lying, and that won't change just because it's in a contract. So I'm already not going to believe anything else they disclose and trust only my own inspectors for that.
That extent of damage is nearing the threshold where an insurance company would tear it down and cash you out.
Here's the first furniture in my new apartment:
I mean, right, if someone hands you a stack of papers and says "I'd love to buy your house, but first cough up $25k right the fuck now to fix problems," would you be able to do it? I can't even imagine how you begin to finance things like that.
Add to this that we talked the seller down below their offer floor, and this is a recipe for someone walking away.
Nuri and I both agree that if they can do things in a timely manner, we'll go forward. Otherwise, we walk away, take a month off, and start again. We're willing to go forward because everything can be easily fixed - it's just money. It's all just a bucket of money you throw at the house and things work again.
It's a bit of a clusterfuck, no lie, but these are the known hurdles in buying a house. I'm really just impressed that it failed all four major categories of inspection that allow you to get out of a contract.
Sellers, you fix all of it, at your expense, to code, and you have all of the work scheduled to start by the end of May at the latest, or goodbye.
It's just a house. It's not even the only house under consideration that has a double oven. We're willing to wait a few months -- that's actually advantageous to us. But our lease is up at the end of October, and that's my hard line.
My father always said "Don't fall in love with a house till after you buy it".
And then there is the mold growing in strange places and the strange parasites :-p
Now, if I were the seller, and also an asshole, I'd walk away, take the house off the market, do cheap and/or sub-standard repairs that would pass a casual inspection, and re-list in a year at a higher asking price.
Lots of variables. We shall see. Attorney is drafting the letter right now.
The best part, this shower is the one in my new apartment!