Newly purchased house has 4 leaks in the foundation...help!
I just closed on a 31 yr old home in Lake Forest Park on Aug 18th and discovered last week during the heavy rain that the foundation is leaking in 4 different spots, and leaking badly. Our inspector saw 2 of the leaks and said that they appeared to be fixed since there is stuff smeared on it...it wasnt fixed. The leaks were not disclosed to us either and now we are stuck trying to figure out what we can do so we do not have to pay for a foundation company to come and fix the issue that we were not told about. Is there any recourse that we have that can get the home repaired without us paying for it? Thank you everyone.
Comments
Before I venture into a discussion about how to get it done for free..... I have a few questions about why a few leaks are a problem?...
Is the "foundation" a wall of a basement a living area? Describe the space..
Hope this helps and thank you
That said...Take lots of video and photos. Act promptly.
I would have your attorney send a letter to each party associated with the transaction.....the seller who filled out the disclosure form, the sellers agent, the sellers broker, your home inspector, your agent. The letter should set out the facts that you had done your due diligence and had been advised and assured by each of these parties that the "repairs" had been done and the walls did not leak.... But contrary to all of those assurances they do in fact leak only 3 weeks after closing due to no fault of your own.
Your attorney will advise you of your choice of remedies, which could include Rescinding the sale or Repairing the faults and suing for reimbursement of your expenses. The professionals, in particular the Home Inspector has insurance for this kind of thing.
Most likely, because you were aware of the faults and were willing to purchase the property with flaws that had been repaired, you should choose to have the leaks stopped by a contractor/engineer of your choice so that you have the situation that you originally bargained for.
Once that is accomplished then sue for reimbursement from each of the other parties.
It's a hassle and will take a while but that's the way it goes...
Again, this is only my non-legal opinion and sense of how it will go.
Solution? Either eliminate water source (often difficult if not impossible) but check for downspout discharge locations, yard sloped towards the foundation, and other potential sources for outside water.
Long-term solution is to lower the hydraulic pressure on the other side of the walls. This is typically done by saw-cutting a trench in the floor along the perimeter walls and installing a drainage pipe which leads to a sump in one corner in which a sump pump is located. Trench is filled with drain rock and then cemented over. Pump discharges outside somewhere where the water will not make it back into the house.
If you plan on ever finishing any of the basement spaces, they have these really-cool 1/4" thick "water-collection" panels that are porous on the back and sealed on the opposite side which are permanently attached to the cement walls, with the bottoms of the panels draining into the floor trenches described above. Wall is then covered with moisture barrier and finished conventionally. Any moisture which makes it through the cement wall is collected by this panel and harmlessly drained away.
Of course, any time you are dependent upon an electrically-powered pump to keep your house dry, you have to also think about what happens during a power outage (which tend to occur during the big winter storms). They have battery-powered backup pump systems available (good if you are away from home when the power is out), or you can consider a small generator.
Don't ask me how I know all this stuff! My crawl space turns into an Olympic-sized pool when the power is out for a few hours during a storm. Yes, I did know about this when I bought the place. Yes, I have spare pumps in the shed as well as a generator and fresh gas. Yes, it sucks to own a house with water problems (sewer problems warrant a completely separate post and I'll spare you the details).
Let us know if you are spitting in the ocean, swimming against the current, or just rolling down the river, as this story goes downstream.
2) Try Craig Blackmon or Marc as to attorney at WA Law. I'll send Craig a link to this forum thread.
Feel fre to give me a call to chat specifically about your situation.
To me that reads you bought the house with full knowledge that it had leaked in the past, and might leak again in the future, given they "appeared to be fixed" with no guarantees that the problem was fixed.
Actually from that statement I would have to assume it was NOT fixed, as "stuff smeared on it" is not the normal remedy for such a problem. Whether there were 2 holes leaking or 4 holes leaking seems irrelevant, as once you know there are holes leaking...you are on notice that it is going to leak. As soon as the inspector saw that problem, you likely should have called for estimates as part of the inspection contingency. Not sure why you didn't, and why you expected a dry basement after being advised about leaks and holes with stuff smeared over the holes.
If you intend to pursue this legally, I would seriously recommend that you remove this forum question from the internet, as it suggests to me that you should have known about this problem before you closed escrow.
That's a pretty silly comment there David...but then...I'll consider the source.
Ardell, my interpretation of Richardthans' statement is that the leaks had been identified, and he had recieved some sort of assurance that they were repaired. This forum certainly isn't a sworn statement type of communication anyway. He could have been unclear or imprecise in his blogging.
In his non professional, consumer position he relied upon the representations or statements of the professionals around him. "Detrimental Reliance" might be the legal term. Or "Negligence". I've had Realtors strongly advise me to pursue further inspections out of an abundance of caution on their parts..
The realtors each had incentive to close the deal, not waive the buyer off.
I haven't read the inspector's report. Unless it states in writing that the foundation appears to leak or have leaked recently, RT has a strong case that he felt assured by the inspection that the work was sufficient. Errors and Omissions insurance.
This person is asking for a way around an inspection report, and personal observation. That's the statement.
Your entire dialog may be appreciated as a recommendation, then turns silly.
You are not an attorney, you involved an attorney, then Craig wants to figure out the basis of his fee.
It's just silly.
I would caution any one, and every one, about advice you get about Real Estate from an internet forum. We are all here to promote ourselves. Consider that, when considering the source.
Most contracts between a home buyer and a home inspector limit the inspectors obligation with regard to identifying water intrusion issues. Consequently the inspectors E & O generally would not cover a water intrusion issue.
David,
At minimum if Richard consults an attorney, he should seek that attorney's opinion as to whether or not the statements he has made here would hurt him in pursuit of this issue. The last thing you want is for the attorney on the other side to bring in this statement, and for Richard's attorney to not have known it was here...in print. Surprises are not good in a Court Room.
To me it reads that the buyer should not be surprised if water comes in, given he was told that water had come in in the past, and the remedy was not a warranted fix. Maybe everyone would not read it that way, but only Richard's attorney can decide if it is worth the risk of leaving that comment here. I can't see any reason why an attorney would want it to remain on the internet.
A warranted fix for this type of problem can cost many thousands of dollars...not a "silly" issue.