Possible Sewer Line "Up Sell" Tactics

[Barbisi]

I hadn't had a chance to update everyone on what we were told about tricky tactics used by the company originally hired to clean and scope the sub-main kitchen/washing machine basement line.
Our current realtors warned us that this company is known for "up selling" repairs and services not needed at all or at at least not in the near future ( i.e. the next two years ) . Since this line was never scoped ,we do not know for certain whether the cast iron pipes are corroded or cracked at all, unless it backs up again (which it hasn't since the cleaning!) .We may not be on the hook for this costly repair since we are not required to disclose just supposition on the part of the repairman to the home inspector when the time comes to sell unless of course there is a blockage. We will follow the suggestions for extra hot water usage, etc. and get the main line cleaned frequently.
It's not our place to fix every sewer line for the buyers just because the house is 45 years old! The sellers sold us two less than perfect houses and we should be allowed to do the same! We can't spend another 100k making this house like new.

[justbroke]

I always hire a residential inspector. I don't hire the cheapest one either, but someone that is well known and very good at their job. I bought a new house in North Carolina and hired an inspector. The builder was shocked, but my inspector found code violations and a couple of defects. The builder was then impressed, somewhat, that their sub missed some things; it happens.

I think that due-dilligence is a must for any home older than 10 years and for which is not still under the original builder's warranty. Especially when it comes to roofs, mechanical systems, plumbing, septic tanks, electrical systems, and structural/foundational areas, I will always hire an inspector. The sales agreement will be subject to a clear inspection or conditional on the seller fixing the items by closing and detailing the repairs along with receipts.

At least, that is how I always approach a resale. I even approach it similarly for new homes.

[Barbisi]

Well, jb, if we want to sell the house and receive some money, instead of just letting it be foreclosed on, we are not going to be to able redo all the plumbing,etc. (i.e. build the buyers a new house!)
It's not a crime to sell the house "as is" (That's how we got into BK13 in the first place -fixing other people's pass the buck, hand-me-downs repairs.)
I think our realtors know the law and if it hasn't been scoped, then it isn't definite ,so we can't know the extent of all possible repairs and we shouldn't believe because of this guy's claim, we will never be able to sell the house with out a $$$ redo. And if we don't know for sure, then we aren't responsible to fix things with out first doing a scope that proves the problem.
Right now we can't afford a residental inspector - as you know we are trying to survive a hellish BK13, one which the trustee seems determined to ensure we won't be able to finish.
If the home passed inspection four years ago (and it did!) then it should again with out us having to replace every major system (as we did on the other house!) I'm sure we'll have to cough up some money but this time we aren't going all out - if it's working ,then it 's good enough! And if we have to lose some money to sell it sooner, so be it!
The law doesn't require a perfect house ,just one that can pass minimum inspection!

[shipo]

Selling a house "as is" happens all of the time. I sold a home built in 1906 years ago where the buyer's inspector found lots of things to fuss about which in turn gave the buyers more fodder to grind me on price. I was already annoyed with the buyer's constant requests and demands and I finally said, "No problem, here's your earnest money back; you're free to go buy something else." That shut them up and we ultimately closed on the agreed date at the agreed price.

[Barbisi]

Exactly, shipo! The sooner we "unload" this house on some one who is financially able to fix everything that is going to need repairs in 3, 5 or 10 years time, the better off we'll be. Trying to live here for 2-3 years or longer, just so we can fix everything like good, conscientious sellers, so the buyers can have a 100% upgraded house is a BK13 redux recipe -and we'll never be able to relocate with some money!

[justbroke]

Yes, you can absolutely sell a home "as-is", I would just never buy one as my personal residence.

At least I wouldn't purchase an "as-is" (no inspection) home unless it was a foreclosure, short sale, estate sale, or literally a "fire" sale. Those types of purchases are made every day, but at much less than market value. While I should have clarified that I -- and most banks -- require an inspection as a condition of sale for market (value) properties. All other properties are speculative and purchase as investment, fix-n-flip, or purely just a rehab because it looks like a fun project.

The gist of my post was that expectations are exactly the issue. As shipo mentioned, those buyers were just price haggling (which is done always). "I don't like that color paint." "The door is rotting." Those are cosmetic complaints. The roof leaking, septic and sewer issues are actual price changers. A review of major mechanical systems is a reason to pay below market or get cash at closing.

In the end the sale price is when a willing buyer and a willing seller agree on a price.

I offered what I require for a sale and, for my personal residence, only buy new construction or homes less than 5 years old and still with builder's warranty. Now, if it was a fixer upper, or fix-n-flip, I'd definitely offer below market and would accept "as-is." Some sellers will price their "as-is" deal appropriately while others get stuck on the price.

Regardless, you should, even if buying an "as-is" property, still do your due diligence. You should still make sure that the place is inhabitable, free from certain major defects... or adjust the price accordingly.

That's my bottom line. (And this is actually a bottom line in my post.)

[justbroke]

Barbisi I think my post came across the wrong way. I was trying to say that it is the buyer's, not the seller's, choice to how extensive an inspection should be done. The saying is "caveat emptor" -- buyer beware, for a reason. My post was not to suggest that you're doing anything wrong, but to point out that many... okay maybe just me... require an inspection commensurate with the age of the home. New homes get a quick inspection. Newer homes a little more on the mechanical systems. Old homes (> 30 years) should get the full treatment... in my book.

I was showing a glimpse of what the buyers are looking at. Especially after you had all those issues with the home, that makes me more wary of buying anything but a new or spec build. Even with a new/spec build, I still have an inspection performed.

[Barbisi]

Thank you jb for explaining that.
I was warning others that some of these sewer guys may be trying to sell repairs that may be or may not be needed for years in the future. This gentleman claimed every one in this neighborhood had already or would shortly have the same exact problem, which is kind of suspicious. But he did give us some tips to try to prevent any minor future flooding or back up. This is not the main sewer line, so it has never been scoped.
We do not have to reveal this unless it happens again and actually needs to be scoped. Of course, the main sewer line is of chief interest to the home inspector. (is a residental inspector the same thing?)
We have to try to minimize unnecessary repairs as much as is legally possible in order to come out of this debacle with something.

[justbroke]

We have to try to minimize unnecessary repairs as much as is legally possible in order to come out of this debacle with something.

I know what you mean. I deferred so much maintenance on the last home, it wasn't funny. It would have cost about $21,000 to replace the 3 A/C units and that's when I gave up.