Sentences with phrase «known property defects»

Not exact matches

In many states, the owner is required to disclose all known defects when selling a property.

Agents need to be mindful that if they have knowledge of a defect, patent (obvious) or latent (hidden), this information needs to be «disclosed» in the actual listing; the listing agent needs to draw to the attention of his seller, making the seller aware that his agent «knows,» whatever he knows, or surmises, has seen with his own eyes, or has been made aware by his seller — sometimes surreptitiously, (by agent's putting the information confirmation in writing and has advised the seller the need for disclosing), directing his seller to get «fix - it» quotes, repair before going to market, or offer a rebate to his buyer for the dollar amount involved, and advise the seller that this information if known by his agent, or by the seller, «must» be disclosed in some manner, in writing, so as to prevent the seller and all the agents involved (including «team members), both buying and selling sides, from lawsuits, or possible resultant non-closing of transactions, not just even non-removal of conditions, (failing which clauses, conditional clauses — condition precedent, not condition subsequent — self destruct) during which lag time the subject property is theoretically off the market wasting valuable market time, which could prove especially financially disastrous in any sort of turbulent down - turning market.

Nevertheless, you need to understand that title insurance will not protect you against title defects that are known to you before you purchased the property.

Under no circumstances will the sites or the Chopra parties be liable to you for any loss or damages of any kind that are directly or indirectly related to the sites, the materials in the sites, the downloadable items, user content, your use or inability to use, or the performance of the sites, any action taken in connection with an investigation by the sites or law enforcement authorities regarding your use of the sites, and action taken in connection with copyright or other intellectual property owners, any errors or omission in the sites, technical operation, or any damage to any users computer, hardware, software, wireless devices, cellular phone, modem or other equipment or technology, including without limitation damage from any security breach or from any virus, bugs, tampering, fraud, scam, error, omission, interruption, defect, delay in operation or transmission, computer line or network failure or any other technical or other malfunction, even if foreseeable or even if the sites or Chopra parties have been advised of or should have known of the possibility of such damages, whether in an action of contract, negligence, strict liability or tort.

The plaintiff alleged that this constituted a latent defect in the property which the defendants knew about and concealed from the plaintiff.

Sellers and their agents have a duty to disclose all known latent defects, including whether a property was a grow op, however some sellers or agents may intentionally withhold such information in an effort to encourage the sale of the property at a higher price.

Purchasers who purchase a property where the seller failed to disclose a known latent defect may be able to seek damages from the seller or their agent for failing to disclose the latent defect, and purchasers should seek prompt legal advice regarding their rights and available remedies.

A property owner may be released of liability if they can prove one of the following scenarios: that you were aware of the defect before you were injured, the defect was «open and obvious,» misuse of the property led to your injury, or the property owner didn't know about the defect and reasonable shouldn't have known.

Property owners, managers and businesses are responsible to repair known defects or clean up spills that can create the risk of a slip - and - fall accident or other event that can cause injury.

Property owners are required to maintain their premises free from defects and are to warn of any known defects, but «only reasonable care» is required.

Regardless of who is liable, in order to establish a premises liability claim there must be some evidence of a defect or a dangerous condition on the property that caused the injury, and evidence that the property owner should have known of the dangerous condition.

Moreover, it is implied that the property owner has posted warnings about any known defects on the premises, or otherwise taken measures to correct those defects.

Using the Property Disclosure Statement Licensees are not required to disclose a known material latent defect to a buyer if the seller has already disclosed all known material latent defects, in writing, to the buyer.

The Transaction Broker must disclose all known facts and defects that materially affect the value of the property and are not readily observable by the buyer.

If the defect is proved to have existed prior to selling the property but the seller didn't know about it (perhaps the defect didn't appear while the seller owned the property), then the seller can't be held liable, even innocently.

From a legal perspective, the property manager's inaction could not be justified, and his willful failure to repair the known defect resulted in his being liable for the injuries received.

This piece of worthless garbage (the SPIS) is nothing more than a smoke - screen vehicle to be adopted by sellers (whether honest or dishonest in nature, not to mention their ignorance of the state of their own properties) in pursuit of facilitating smooth sales whereby sales would be more difficult to achieve without the supposed «feel good» SPIS boxes being initialed «yes» or «no», as the case may be, reflecting the negative reality, or positive unreality, as the case may be, of the condition / hidden defects of the said listed properties.

6) The law states that you, the seller, must disclose any and all «known» defects of a latent nature within your property when selling same, but to whom... to just the potential buyer... or to the whole world via the listing?

'' It is important for registrants to know that while sellers are required by law to disclose material latent defects affecting a property that are known to them (an obligation which also exists for the seller's representative if the material latent defect is also known by the representative), there is no legislation or case law in Ontario to suggest that a seller, or his or her representative, is required to disclose the existence of stigmas to buyers.

A real estate licensee serving as a transaction broker has two duties under the state's property condition disclosure law: to make available to the purchaser the seller's disclosure statement and to disclose any defects known to the licensee that are not contained in the disclosure statement.

This form requires you to reveal all known defects to your property.

Agents need to be mindful that if they have knowledge of a defect, patent (obvious) or latent (hidden), this information needs to be «disclosed» in the actual listing; the listing agent needs to draw to the attention of his seller, making the seller aware that his agent «knows,» whatever he knows, or surmises, has seen with his own eyes, or has been made aware by his seller — sometimes surreptitiously, (by agent's putting the information confirmation in writing and has advised the seller the need for disclosing), directing his seller to get «fix - it» quotes, repair before going to market, or offer a rebate to his buyer for the dollar amount involved, and advise the seller that this information if known by his agent, or by the seller, «must» be disclosed in some manner, in writing, so as to prevent the seller and all the agents involved (including «team members), both buying and selling sides, from lawsuits, or possible resultant non-closing of transactions, not just even non-removal of conditions, (failing which clauses, conditional clauses — condition precedent, not condition subsequent — self destruct) during which lag time the subject property is theoretically off the market wasting valuable market time, which could prove especially financially disastrous in any sort of turbulent down - turning market.

Most states have laws that mandate disclosing known physical defects in a property.

In addition, buyers and buyer salespeople should always ask sellers and the sellers» salesperson point blank if there are any hidden defects in the property that they should know about, and make a note about anything that is said to you.

In Hawaii, a seller has a duty to identify all known defects on the property which would likely affect the value of the property.

Sellers must disclose known material latent defects about their property to a buyer.

Like licensees in agency relationships, transaction licensees must disclose known material defects about the property.

The buyer agent must act in the buyer / tenant's best interest, including making a continuous and good faith effort to find a property for the buyer / tenant, except while the buyer is subject to an existing contract, and must keep all confidential information, other than known material defects about the property, confidential.

A dual agent may not take any action that is adverse or detrimental to either party but must disclose known material defects about the property.

All confidential information relayed by the seller / landlord must be kept confidential except that a licensee must reveal known material defects about the property.

A broker must disclose known defects in the property for sale or lease.

First, the buyer's agent must disclose knowledge of a material defect or condition about the property that affects health or safety and that defect is not known or readily observable to the buyer.

Such information is accurate and complete and does not omit or fail to disclose any material defects regarding the Property known to Seller.

Even though the seller is not required by law to disclose defects about the property, the listing agent is required to disclose anything that s / he knows or reasonably should have known about the property.

The Sellers gave to the Buyers a property condition disclosure form on which the Sellers checked the «yes» box next to a question asking whether they knew of any «current water leakage, water accumulation, excess dampness or other defects with the basement / crawl space».

It is highly doubtful that viewpoint knows every pertinent piece of information relevant to every property, discloses those that are crack houses, mould laden, rat infested or suffering any latent defect at all.

❑ have you informed the seller about their obligation to disclose any known material latent defect in the property even if they do not complete a Property Disclosure Stproperty even if they do not complete a Property Disclosure StProperty Disclosure Statement?

In British Columbia, it is important for consumers to know that while sellers and licensees representing sellers are required by law to disclose material latent defects affecting a property, they are not required by law to disclose the existence of possible stigmas that might be of concern to specific buyers.

Chapter 93A requires brokers, salespersons, and other business persons to disclose all facts known by a real estate licensee about defects in a property, even if a buyer or tenant does not ask.