Sold House-buyer Says I Owe Her For A Recent Flood
I sold a house in WA state. It closed escrow last May. I used a real estate company and have all the appropriate paperwork. The buyer waived her rights to any inpections, if I fixed the drain and did a couple other things. I did so. However, I got a "handiman" not a licensed and bonded contractor to do it.
Now, (last week) there was a lot of rain in a short amount of time and her garage and downstairs flooded. This is a split level home. I live out of state and do not know the exact damage. She claims she had to replace the carpet and had some damage.
She told me after escrow closed that she was painting and was going to replace the carpet as well. This does not seem to be my fault. I did not knowingly do anything wrong? I think she wants me to pay for the carpet under false pretences.
Am I liable? Do I need an attorney? :-?
Not using a licensed contractor may have compormised your situation. Check with an attorney.
I had someone like this come at me recently after a sale. If you disclosed honestly on the listing and identifited any problems that you were aware of then she does not have a leg to stand on.
You should not give her any information at all. Just tell her that the property is sold, and she should contact her insurance company as you are not responsible for any "acts of god" that happened after the sale.
Most importantly, do not have any further contact with her after this. If she talks to an attorney they will tell her she has a VERY tough case. Do not tell her what you did, or did not do to the property, who fixed it, or anything of that nature. The more info you give, the stronger her case becomes, even if you are not at fault, which you are not.
_________________
Hope this Helps!
Bill[ Edited by telemon on Date 08/31/2004 ]
Just don't talk to her, make her put any complaint in writing, then have your lawyer respond to that.
This puts all the pressure on her, as she has to think carefully what, if anything, she's willing to write down, and she can't get any "spontaneous utterances" from you over the phone...and this deprives her of a major tool in dealing with you.
Trust me, as I've seen lots of experts at just this kind of "call, catch offguard & question before she can think" blitzing, and the ONLY safe defense is for you & me not to even talk to them...this way we cannot make any unthinking, spontaneous statements or admissions, promises, etc. over the phone.
Once she understands she cannot catch you offguard on phone, she will probably go away as she likely does have a hard case.
That is, IF you disclosed openly whatever the property conditions were upfront; however if she bought the property "as is" then she likely has no case whatever.
If you do hear from her again, then do bring your WA lawyer in on it, and I may be able to help you here with a name or two of some lawyers whom I know and trust.
FYI, the Agent & Broker who represented you would probably be parties to the case too, if they let you shortcut the required disclosure forms required by the State of WA, or otherwise gave you poor advice on your sales agreement.
John Merchant
[addsig]
When you say that you fixed the "drain", are you referring to the "drain-spout" for the gutters on the house? or the drain in the kitchen or bathroom sink? Or what?
As I see it, even if your "handyman" wasn't a licensed contractor, it wouldn't matter unless the specific items he "fixed" were the cause of the damage.
It sounded as though the flooding were due to rains, not due to a bad plumbing job. If the house flooded because the downspout on the gutter (which you may have fixed) were positioned incorrectly, then MAYBE she has a case. However, didn't she have a walk-through prior to closing? Why didn't she identify it as an exception item then, especially if it was something she specifically asked you to fix earlier?
Also, unless there are specific legal protections in place for the buyer (like the normal lead-based paint disclosures, etc.), or unless items are found that are safety related and undisclosed, if they waive repairs or accept the building in its visible condition, and (s)he had a chance to inspect and didn't, then I'm not sure how you would be held responsible for items found after the fact.
And one more thing: unfortunately, whatever she told in the a conversation is worthless if you go into litigation. You would need hard, admissable-in-a-court-of-law evidence to support you...not "she said..."
This house closed over a year ago and she had no problems with whatever was fixed until now? Even if you ignore the fact that she bought "as is" and waived any inspection previous, it seems to me you'd not be found at fault. I wouldn't recommend talking to her either, she sounds like she's "fishing".
Good luck!
I'm a licensed RE agent in WA state and not an attorney, so here's my opinion:
The flooding problem is the new owners. Unless they can prove otherwise (Did the Disclosure form - Form 17 - have flooding as a past problem) it's not your concern. While we can feel for the new owner, how does anyone know if she regraded the house and yard and might have caused the drainage to come into the home. In short - we don't. Might I suggest that you wish her well and explain that this problem is not yours to fix. Would she share $20,000 worth of gold coin that was found under the carpet when it was replaced? The home is hers - good, bad, or indifferent. You don't need an attorney, nor are you liable.
Thanks everybody for your replies. They are most appreciated.
I contacted an attorney in WA and they will review the paperwork that I have. Hopefully he will agree that I do not need an attorney.
I suppose that is possible. but who ever heard of an attorney agreeing that you don't need an attorney. lol just a funny observation, not a knock on anyone.
Scott