Gross McGinley LLP

Blog Disclaimer

Blog Disclaimer

This Blog is intended for educational and informational purposes and intended to only provide you with a general understanding of the law, not to provide any legal advice, including on the subject of the Blog. Laws that may pertain to this Blog will vary by jurisdiction, and the information on this blog may not apply to you. The content within this Blog is not intended, and should not be construed, in any way to be legal advice and thus you should not rely on any information provided in the Blog as legal advice. You should consult with appropriate legal counsel concerning any issues for which legal advice may be needed. Your review or use of the Blog and the content therein is not intended to create, and does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Please contact us if you have any questions about a Blog or would like more information, but, by contacting us, no attorney-client relationship is formed between you and Gross McGinley, LLP, including the Blog author. Do not send any confidential information to Gross McGinley, LLP or the authors of the Blog without first speaking to one of our lawyers and receiving our permission to provide confidential information. Unsolicited confidential information sent to us may not be subject to an attorney-client privilege and may not be treated as confidential. This Blog is not published for advertising or solicitation purposes. Gross McGinley, LLP disclaims all liability to all persons for any claim, loss, liability or any damages that may arise in connection with the Blog and any content or information contained in the Blog. Even though we strive to create our Blog content based on our current understanding of the law, we cannot and do not guarantee that the content and information in the Blog is current, accurate, or complete. Gross McGinley, LLP owns the copyright in the Blog, which is protected by federal and state laws, including copyright laws. The Blog cannot be altered or modified in any way. A copy of the Blog may be used and printed only for personal, educational, informational and noncommercial purposes. The Blog cannot be used for any other purpose without the express permission of Gross McGinley, LLP.

Legal Relief for Homebuyers Who Unknowingly Purchase Money Pits

Written by: Ryan Stauffer on April 04, 2017 | Category: Blog | Tags:

It’s a homebuyer’s nightmare scenario. You buy what seems to be a great house, but then begin to discover problems — mold, termite damage, rotting wood, water infiltration, sagging floors, cracking beams. You think the previous owners must have known about these problems, but they were nowhere on the seller’s disclosure form. How did the home inspector miss all of this? Now, a contractor is saying that the home you just bought for $350,000 needs $150,000 in structural repairs. Is there any way out of this money pit? Luckily, in Pennsylvania there are several legal options for homebuyers who find themselves in this unfortunate situation.

One option is to seek recovery from the seller of the home. There are several legal theories that permit a homebuyer to file suit against a seller who denies the existence of known problems or misrepresents the condition of the home. Principal among these legal theories is Pennsylvania’s Real Estate Seller Disclosure Law (“RESDL”), which was enacted in 2001 and requires sellers of residential real estate to disclose to buyers any known material defects in a property disclosure statement. Under the RESDL, a seller may not make representations that the seller knows or has reason to know to be false, misleading, or deceptive. Importantly, the seller’s real estate agent is also bound by this law. If the seller or the seller’s real estate agent knew of a material defect in the home that they misrepresented or failed to disclose to the buyer, they can potentially be held liable under the RESDL and the buyer has the opportunity to recover from them the funds to make necessary repairs. In some situations, it may even be possible to undo the sale and obtain a refund of the purchase price, plus the cost of any home improvements made by the buyer.

Another option is to seek recovery from the home inspector who failed to notify the buyer of the home’s problems. Pennsylvania’s Home Inspection Law exists for this specific purpose. The Home Inspection Law provides that if a home inspector fails to identify problems that should be identified by a reasonably prudent home inspector, they may be liable to the buyer and required to pay for the cost of remedying the problems not identified in their report.

No matter which legal remedies are available to the unlucky homebuyer, time is of the essence. A claim under the RESDL must be filed in court within two years of the date of final settlement. There is even less time to file a claim under the Home Inspection Law — just one year from the date the home inspection report is delivered. In many situations, defects in a newly-purchased home may not become known to the buyer until months after closing, especially if the defect is only occasionally obvious, such as during a particular season or at times of heavy rain. Because of the short window to bring a claim, it is important to seek help quickly if you believe your recently-purchased home has a significant defect.

These laws, and other legal remedies that may apply, are extremely fact-specific. If you have questions about your situation, do not hesitate to contact us to review your circumstances and potential options.


Attorney Ryan L. Stauffer is a member of the firm’s Litigation Group, representing individuals and businesses in court cases.

Next Previous
View All Attorneys
View All Practice Areas
View Blog