←back to thread

402 points cfcfcf | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.202s | source
Show context
brunker2 ◴[] No.44429301[source]
How? It was accessible through a door. Nobody - not the seller, agent, himself or any other prospective buyers, or the building inspector he presumably engaged to check the place over before signing contracts - thought to look behind the door?

How can you buy a house without checking out the foundations/basement yourself or by a pro?

replies(9): >>44429360 #>>44429400 #>>44429461 #>>44429489 #>>44429508 #>>44429578 #>>44429701 #>>44429783 #>>44429823 #
sunnybeetroot ◴[] No.44429701[source]
Whatever the inspector finds, whether it be $50k or $100k or $200k worth of repairs that you request as a price deduction, there’ll be someone else who won’t care about the inspection issues. It’s in your best interest to make the sellers life easier and execute the fastest sale.
replies(1): >>44431076 #
bigstrat2003 ◴[] No.44431076[source]
Only to the extent that your best interest includes buying the house. But if the house needs tens of thousands (or more!) in repairs, then very likely buying the house is not in your best interest. That's kinda the point of an inspection.
replies(1): >>44433010 #
sokoloff ◴[] No.44433010[source]
I don't think there's a 10+ year old house in existence that doesn't need 1-2% or more of the building value in repairs. For the two properties I bought, I had an inspection report for over 10% and around 3% of the purchase price. Neither was a reason to not proceed.
replies(1): >>44433175 #
1. bombcar ◴[] No.44433175[source]
The inspection is less to find and fix things (though sometimes you do) and more to just know what you’re getting into.

Anything that is so bad as to call off the sale was probably visible during a basic walkthrough or from the street, anyway.