Could I be responsible for problems after I sold?

Question

I sold my condo 2 months ago. The home inspector gave it a clean bill of health (except for 2 minor electrical issues which I had repaired). There were no issues with the condo that I know of. I have heard from the condo grapevine that there were leaks from the unit I used to own into the unit below. Can the new owner come after me for problems after they bought it?

Answer 1

Not likely.  Some states are "as is" meaning it is up to the buyer to discover.  Other states require you to disclose what you know.  Either way, if you were unaware of this, you could not be responsible.  

Answer 2

They can only come after you if they can prove that you knew about the defect or reasonably should have known about it.  That is an extremely difficult burden of proof with latent defects.  The buyer would have to secure proof from the occupant below that they had notified you in advance of the closing date of the problem.  To do that, they would need proof of mailing of the notice of the problem, either to the Condo association or to you.  And there would have to be proof of the notification to you by the association if that's how the notice was made.

On top of all of that, leaks from plumbing behind the walls or from the roof are usually considered to be part of the common areas and therefore are the responsibility of the Condo association.

Don't be bothered with what the "grapevine" says.  Only start to get concerned at all should you receive notice of a legal claim being lodged by the buyer.  IF that comes, then contact your attorney of course, but until it does, don't worry about it.

Answer 3

No.

The disclosure that you completed for the sale of the home only requires you to disclose KNOWN defects of the home, and even that list, is limited.

Now, should the HOA have documentation that the tenant below you complained of leaks and you were aware of those leaks (b/c this would leave a paper trail) then you were responsible.

Real Estate Law does not require an owner to go to heroic measures to inspect their own home before selling...that is why there is so much pressure on BUYERS to get a home inspection.

PS:  John is incorrect, you CANNOT write "unknown" on an issue if it is known...that is illegal and if discovered, a buyer can sue a former seller.  

No sales contract has a "blanket" clause where it's contingent on a home inspection in general...no home inspection comes back 100% clean..not even for new construction..that means that someone could walk away over a loose s***w...and I am here to tell you, that ain't hap'nin

Answer 4

The home inspector works for the buyer.  For a fee, he will inspect the property and give the buyer a written report.  He will also explain any findings.

As a result, the buyer should be aware of any issues.  The home inspection is also generally a contingency of the purchase agreement and allows the buyer to walk away.

The seller will often fill out a questionnaire of the condition of the property and any known issues.  Worst case scenario was you knew something that was terribly wrong.  If you wrote "not known" or "unknown", there would probably be no way that a buyer could prove that you did.

Long story short, a buyer could try to go after you for something, but highly unlikely.  In other words, They would have to deal with the home inspection first.  If they agreed to buy the home in the condition it is after being inspected and informed of it, then they have made their decision.

No worries.

John

Would like to respond. I did not mean to intend that writing unknown is the right thing to do.  In fact it is not.  I was simply trying to make a point.

When I bought my home, the seller said there were no known leaks in the roof.  The home inspection found none.

Fast forward to a week after closing ... discovered the ceiling in the front room was the only one painted.  Didn't think anything of it until November,  6 months after closing ... we found out why ...  Leaks!

Now how do I prove that the seller knew this?  I can't.  $12,000 later and after trying to go after the home inspector.  It still cost me $12,000.

Answer 5

Only if they can demonstrate that you knew about previous leaks and failed to disclose them.