Comments on: House of Horrors http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/ Seattle Real Estate Blog for those interested in Seattle real estate, popular culture, tech, news and opinion. Sun, 29 Apr 2012 14:47:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: The Lovely Wife http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8380 The Lovely Wife Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:31:59 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8380 We have sold a stigmatized home in the past. Under Florida law we are not required to disclose events such as these...By the way congrats for winning "The Most Horrific" category on the Real Estate Tomato Halloween Contest...My Best=The Lovely Wife From Active Rain. We have sold a stigmatized home in the past. Under Florida law we are not required to disclose events such as these…By the way congrats for winning “The Most Horrific” category on the Real Estate Tomato Halloween Contest…My Best=The Lovely Wife From Active Rain.

]]> By: Jay Thompson http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8374 Jay Thompson Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:39:02 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8374 No disclosure of murder/death/suicide is required in Arizona. But you do have to disclose if there was ever a meth lab in the home. I suspect however, those that run a meth lab are probably unlikely to actually put it into print... No disclosure of murder/death/suicide is required in Arizona. But you do have to disclose if there was ever a meth lab in the home. I suspect however, those that run a meth lab are probably unlikely to actually put it into print…

]]> By: Gena Riede http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8372 Gena Riede Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:22:10 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8372 Congrats on the win. As a very litigious state here in CA we must disclose all but you bring up a very valid question on just how much do these things effect the value and how long does that prevail. Good points. Congrats on the win. As a very litigious state here in CA we must disclose all but you bring up a very valid question on just how much do these things effect the value and how long does that prevail. Good points.

]]> By: jf.sellsius http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8276 jf.sellsius Sun, 29 Oct 2006 23:49:07 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8276 What's nuttier is that sellers of co-ops are not even required to fill out the disclosure. What’s nuttier is that sellers of co-ops are not even required to fill out the disclosure.

]]> By: Marlow Harris http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8260 Marlow Harris Sun, 29 Oct 2006 18:09:27 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8260 That's nutty! Here, the attitude is "Disclose EVERYTHING" because then, if you do, they can never come back and sue you for something wrong with the house. That’s nutty!

Here, the attitude is “Disclose EVERYTHING” because then, if you do, they can never come back and sue you for something wrong with the house.

]]> By: jf.sellsius http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8257 jf.sellsius Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:44:06 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8257 The Neighborhood Review is an interesting idea---similar to the 3 day rescision period for timeshare purchases. In NY the Seller is required to complete a Property Disclosure but there is a big loophole---if the seller refuses, they credit the buyer $500 at closing. Virtually all sellers choose to pay the $500 rather than risk a case over non-disclosure of material fact. The Neighborhood Review is an interesting idea—similar to the 3 day rescision period for timeshare purchases. In NY the Seller is required to complete a Property Disclosure but there is a big loophole—if the seller refuses, they credit the buyer $500 at closing. Virtually all sellers choose to pay the $500 rather than risk a case over non-disclosure of material fact.

]]> By: Marlow Harris http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8255 Marlow Harris Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:35:59 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8255 Here in Washington State, the seller was required to disclose of a murder, death or suicide in the home, if known. About 10 years ago, they changed that disclosure to require that Seller only disclose a "material fact" that may affect value, without specifying what kind of fact was material. Locally, more burden has been put on the Buyer by offering them a 3-day "Neighborhood Review", where they can research anything they think may be material in their decision to purchase a property. This takes the responsibility away from the Seller, as they now do not have to disclose the presence of a sex offender or half-way house in the neighborhood. Here in Washington State, the seller was required to disclose of a murder, death or suicide in the home, if known. About 10 years ago, they changed that disclosure to require that Seller only disclose a “material fact” that may affect value, without specifying what kind of fact was material. Locally, more burden has been put on the Buyer by offering them a 3-day “Neighborhood Review”, where they can research anything they think may be material in their decision to purchase a property. This takes the responsibility away from the Seller, as they now do not have to disclose the presence of a sex offender or half-way house in the neighborhood.

]]> By: jf.sellsius http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/comment-page-1/#comment-8249 jf.sellsius Sun, 29 Oct 2006 06:51:17 +0000 http://360digest.com/2006/10/28/house-of-horrors/#comment-8249 Profs. Larsen & Coleman did a study of stigmatized homes and found they took 45% longer to sell, and for less $, which is no surprise. The issue of disclosure is interesting. We did a post on this and, as you note, some states (minority)require disclosure, but what qualifies as stigmatized is not subject to uniform definition. The appraisal of stigmatized homes is also an interesting niche. Randall Bell, The Master of Disaster from Laguna Beach, was consulted on the Nicole Brown condo. Here's the link to the post: http://tinyurl.com/yzh8os Also in the post is the link to Stambovsky v. Ackley, NY's most famous haunted house case where the buyer sued to get his money back after buying a "haunted house" and WON. For the brokers involved that was a scary story. A final note on House Blessing. I have personal knowledge of a case where the owner of a house had paranormal activity and engaged the services of a house blesser. ANd it worked. Profs. Larsen & Coleman did a study of stigmatized homes and found they took 45% longer to sell, and for less $, which is no surprise. The issue of disclosure is interesting. We did a post on this and, as you note, some states (minority)require disclosure, but what qualifies as stigmatized is not subject to uniform definition. The appraisal of stigmatized homes is also an interesting niche. Randall Bell, The Master of Disaster from Laguna Beach, was consulted on the Nicole Brown condo.
Here’s the link to the post:
http://tinyurl.com/yzh8os
Also in the post is the link to Stambovsky v. Ackley, NY’s most famous haunted house case where the buyer sued to get his money back after buying a “haunted house” and WON. For the brokers involved that was a scary story.
A final note on House Blessing. I have personal knowledge of a case where the owner of a house had paranormal activity and engaged the services of a house blesser. ANd it worked.

]]>