Real Estate Articles & Blog - Don Dunning
Menu
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don

Not Just Termites, Part 2


By Don Dunning | August 1, 1995

Originally appeared in Hills Publications, August 1, 1995

Understanding the intricacies of termite reports is essential for buyers and sellers because of the potentially large amounts of money involved.

Structural pest control reports are divided in Section 1 and Section 2 items. Section 1 identifies those areas where there is evidence of active infestation or infected wood. Infestation is damage caused by insects, e.g., subterranean termites, powder post beetles. Infection refers to water damage which eventually destroys the wood, e.g., fungus.

Importance of Section 2

Section 2 lists situations which are likely to lead to future destruction, but where no visible damage now exists. Buyers, sellers and even some real estate agents sometimes underestimate the possible implications of Section 2 issues.

Most Section 2 items, such as a small plumbing leak under a sink, are innocuous and of little cause for alarm. Others, conversely, can later become expensive headaches. An example is a shower stall with loose tiles and a small crack in the shower pan. When inspected, there may be no visible leakage into the walls and no evidence of rot or infection to the wood. Over time, however, this could easily develop into a major problem. If the seller agrees to pay for all Sections 1 and 2 items, this will be handled. On the other hand, as so often happens, the seller may agree to be responsible only for section 1 items. The buyer could then be stuck unless he negotiates otherwise.

In the shower stall example above, the buyer might want to talk with the pest control inspector to find out if the tiles and the crack can be grouted so as to be watertight. If not, the buyer needs to either insist that it be repaired (which the seller may feel is unnecessary), or take the risk of a future bill in the range of $3500. It is crucial for the buyer to understand the options and make a decision. The same is true for the seller. Knowledgeable agents offer their clients the necessary information to make these decisions.

Another red flag whose ramifications are not always clearly understood is an item calling for the repair of infection and/or infestation damage in and around the roof area. The pest control company will make reference in their report that the roof “may be disturbed” as a result of the repairs. Because it is not a licensed roofer and cannot give a bid on the cost of repairing the disturbed roof, it will suggest a licensed roofer be called.

The dilemma is that the seller may have agreed to pay for pest control work, but not for damage resulting from that work. If the roof is presently serviceable, he may not see the need to pay for roof repairs as well. Even though a line in the “Seller Warranty” section of the purchase contract might unwittingly commit the seller to also repairing the roof, he may not realize his obligation.

The buyer, if course, is not expecting to purchase a home with a big hole in the roof. So, who pays? Unless the agents discuss the problem with their respective clients as soon as the report is received, this could cause a major upset right before close of escrow. It might even result in a canceled sale.

Who pays?

An addendum to the purchase contract is needed at the beginning to clarify who will pay and how much. In most cases, it is the seller who pays for the roof repairs as well.

Although pest control work can be done before a contract is accepted, it is customarily completed during or after close of escrow and is paid from the seller’s proceeds in escrow. Lenders ordinarily require large reports to be “cleared” before close of escrow. In these instances, I strongly suggest to my sellers that they allow the work to begin only after the buyer has removed all of his contract contingencies in writing. At this point, I also counsel my sellers to require the buyer to deposit in escrow an amount approximating the cost of the pest control work. This provides additional security for the seller that the buyer is committed to closing.

Situations need to be evaluated individually. A $20,000 report doesn’t necessarily call for the buyer to deposit that amount in escrow before the work begins. The buyer could argue that, even if he walks away from the transaction, the seller will still not be harmed as the property needs the work anyway. The issue for the seller, however, is that he would not have had the work done nor laid out the money for it now, except for the buyer’s offer.

Once the work is completed, the company that did the work is entitled to be paid in a timely manner. If there are no proceeds coming from the sale, and the seller doesn’t have $20,000 to pay the bill, we will end up with some upset people. This is why it is so important for the seller to make sure the buyer has something serious at stake if the sale doesn’t close.

New construction

What if a house has just been built? Is a pest control report necessary for brand new construction? Most people say “no,” but I have had buyers who were very happy I suggested they ask for one.

In one instance, the inspection revealed infestation in several tree stumps under the house. The inspector told me that this could have led to infestation of the house itself. The stumps were chemically treated and the infestation disappeared.

In another case, the builder had covered some of the wood siding on the lower part of the home with gravel. Above it was soil that would eventually erode and make contact with the wood, leading to rot. After reading the report, my buyer requested the builder redesign this area to correct the condition, thereby eliminating what would have been a costly, future project.

Limit liability

Although there are endless considerations regarding pest control, I will close with one final caveat. It is always best for sellers to limit their liability in writing and not assume anything. As for buyers, it is not advisable for them to agree to purchase a property “As Is” without fully researching the costs.

An example is a home which was purchased this year [1995]. The property had had a pest control report of about $3000 fourteen months earlier. The work had not been done. Both the seller and his agent assumed a new report from the same firm would result in approximately the same cost. To compound matters, the seller did not order a new inspection until he had an accepted contract. Contrary to prudent practice, the seller did not limit his liability in the purchase contract. The new report came in at over $30,000.

How could this have happened? The original report clearly stated that the pest control condition was marginal and a lack of maintenance could lead to extensive damage. After over a year of neglect and abnormally heavy rains, the driveway ramp and other areas had now deteriorated badly, yet it was not noticeable. This was a surprise the seller could have avoided. And, imagine what would have happened if the buyer had relied on the first report without getting an updated one, buying the property “As Is?”

Final Thoughts

Termite reports deal with a lot more than just termites. Minimizing their importance could turn your hard-earned sawbucks into dust.

Related Articles:

Not Just Termites, Part 1

 

 

Copyright 1995 Don Dunning (Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985)
Permission is given to freely copy any or all articles for personal and
noncommercial use provided they are copied in full without
modification and that proper attribution is given.
These articles may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, nor linked to from another site.

Tags: Buying a home, Newspaper article, Selling a Home, termites

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Categories


  • Adding Value – Gardening/Landscaping/Renovations (29)
  • Alameda (2)
  • Around the House (20)
  • Carmel (1)
  • Community (43)
  • Condos (2)
  • Environment (27)
  • Events (13)
  • Expert Witness (7)
  • General Information (23)
  • Going Green (14)
  • History (13)
  • Home Maintenance (15)
  • Homeless (1)
  • Homes for Sale (8)
  • Hourly Consulting (10)
  • Local Attractions (24)
  • Mortgages-Loans (9)
  • New Orleans (1)
  • Oakland Neighborhoods (27)
  • Oh, Please (7)
  • Parks (1)
  • Pets (4)
  • Real Estate (285)
  • Real Estate Advice (109)
  • Real Estate in the News (77)
  • Real Estate Newspaper Articles (164)
  • Restaurants (3)
  • Rockridge (1)
  • Shops (6)
  • Technology (1)
  • The Economy (48)
  • Travel (3)

Tags


Buying Buying a home California unemployment Choosing an agent City Ordinance Cohousing Communal Housing construction data mining Dimond East Bay Events Expert Witness gardening green living Historical Sites home inspections Home Loans home maintenance lead paint legislation Mortgages multiple offers Newspaper article Oakland Oaktoberfest Oktoberfest Online real estate organic Pets Points of Interest Real Estate Advice Real Estate Law real estate news renovation Rockridge schools Selling a Home shopping social networking Tax Credit Technology termites The Economy Travel

Archives


  • May 2017
  • February 2017
  • November 2016
  • September 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • January 2008
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • October 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003
  • November 2002
  • October 2002
  • September 2002
  • August 2002
  • July 2002
  • June 2002
  • May 2002
  • April 2002
  • January 2002
  • November 2001
  • October 2001
  • September 2001
  • August 2001
  • July 2001
  • June 2001
  • May 2001
  • April 2001
  • February 2001
  • January 2001
  • November 2000
  • October 2000
  • September 2000
  • August 2000
  • July 2000
  • June 2000
  • May 2000
  • March 2000
  • February 2000
  • January 2000
  • November 1999
  • August 1999
  • July 1999
  • May 1999
  • April 1999
  • March 1999
  • January 1999
  • October 1998
  • September 1998
  • July 1998
  • June 1998
  • February 1998
  • November 1997
  • October 1996
  • May 1996
  • August 1995
  • July 1995

Copyright © 2018 Don Dunning - Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985

Theme created by PWT. Powered by WordPress.org