BROKER DOES NOT DISCLOSE HOUSE IS UNDER LITIGATION -IS THIS ETHICAL??


We put in an offer to buy a wonderful landmarked house which we were told the sellers (heirs) were eager to unload. We made an offer that the sellers Realtor recommended would be successful, which was accepted. We were then told that we had to both hire an attorney and get an engineer’s report before any contract would be signed. We were also told that we had to do all this in a big hurry to satisfy a pending state tax debt. We complied.
Strange things began to occur the very next day… and we suspected that someone else might be vying for this house. We were personally assured this was not the case. Phrases like, “no… no one else is involved” and, “don’t worry, the house is absolutely yours” were used. So, we hired the attorney, and an inspector (lots of $$$). We inspected and asked for concessions (credit) for some rather severe structural damage. We were resoundingly dismissed. No one contacted us from the realtor’s office again. However, the seller contacted us last night to ask what happened. In our talk, I discovered that this property was under litigation between the sellers. On sibling was suing the other two, trying to force then to sell to a speculator. Unbeknownst to us, a judge had decided the day before on behalf of the speculator because we had asked for repairs credits which might have made our offer less. We actually did nto ask for a particular amount, but this was enough to make the judge

I’m pretty angry about this.
But my question is: is this ethical for the realtor to have done? She did not advertise the house as an “As Is”, nor did she inform us that the house was under this litigation. Why would she have pushed us to get an attorney right away and an inspection- if the house sale was As Is? She also did not convey messages from both the seller and me requesting an urgent conference with the other. In fact the seller tried to locate me for days before this judgment. And I had requested numerous times a meeting with the seller. If I had known about this situation, I would have been able to respond.
If I had been informed, I likely would either not have bid at all, or not spent all that money for a structural engineers inspection when I was on my own to begin with. I would have been able to contemplate the ramifications of an As Is purchase. Instead I was lied to and tricked into competing in a pending legal mess.
By the way, even though I looked at this property at least 9 times, not once did the broker or realtor ask me to sign a disclosure sheet before seeing the property. I am told this is a violation of license.
Do I have any recourse?

By hardwerkin | | Comment

859 St Marks Avenue


hi everyone,
I might be the “lucky” person who gets to restore 859 Saint Marks Avenue.
I am having second thoughts, though.
Our offer was accepted, but the engineer’s report was about as bad as one could expect. The needed repairs greatly exceed the value of the house – by many hundreds of thousands. The Now Landmarked building needs a LOT of historical restoration. The side façade is also leaking like a sieve… in need of pointing and brick replacement …which no one has ever mentioned before on any forums.
My question is has anyone else gotten a report or inspection done on this house? Is there any advice to be given. I have the ability to pull out of this sale. I put language in the accepted offer which allows me this option if the repairs are over 750k. I have also discovered the title has some major problems as does the C of O (SRO??). The city swears it is, the realtor swears it isn’t. Who do I believe? It has tenant violations, which means if it is an SRO, I’m in for a very, very long (years) wait to begin any rehab.

I’m afraid I may have bought a rather large paperweight.

Any advice?

By hardwerkin | | Comment