The Washington Seller Disclosure Statement has been a huge failure since it’s passage on January 1, 1996. Why is this important? If you are a buyer, you might expect that you are protected by the Washington Seller Disclosure Statement, which requires the seller to disclose all defects of the property. Having practiced as a real estate lawyer for 20 years, I can tell you that this law and the Form 17 Seller Disclosure Statement does not protect you from seller misrepresentation, whether it is intentional or unintentional. But you ought to know how you are effected as a buyer or as a seller.
Washington Seller Disclosure Statement Law
When the wise politicians of the state of Washington passed the Washington Seller Disclosure Statement law in 1996, I remember saying, “This law will have no beneficial effect for buyers at all.” The reason I said that was because you cannot legislate honesty. Our courts are just as full of seller misrepresentation lawsuits today as they were before this law. If a seller is going to lie about a defect in the house that is not clearly visible to a buyer, that same seller will simply mark “Do not know” on the disclosure statement on that question. By answering “Do not know” the seller eliminates the buyer’s ability to prove they did know. The rules of evidence do not help. You can’t prove what someone knew or did not know in their head. This is a no brainer. Unfortunately, the politicians who passed the seller disclosure law and the lawyers around the state of Washington who continue to support new laws and subtle nuances to contract language addressing seller disclosure are . . . “smart by half” as the saying goes. As I have said in other articles, one should be cautious about people who claim they are going to protect us, especially when those people are politicians and lawyers.
Washington Seller Disclosure Statement Issues in the P&S
In an earlier post I wrote extensively about the requirement that Washington real estate forms (the NWMLS forms) include a line 9 in the Purchase and Sale Agreement with an option for a buyer to sue or not sue a seller for the tort of misrepresentation. Lawyers around the state decided that the NWMLS needed to include a line 9 in the Purchase and Sale Agreement in which the seller agreed or disagreed to be sued by the buyer for what could be unknowing or unintentional negligence about some aspect of the property. Leave it up to the lawyers to come up with a check box in which a seller can agree or disagree to be sued! This was a huge legal boondoggle that confused real estate agents (not to mention buyers and sellers) around the state and generated more lawsuits for lawyers. Read my full analysis of line 9 and seller misrepresentation at Washington Seller Disclosure Statement.
Now we have a new case, which is forcing the NWMLS (Northwest Multiple Listing Service) to delete line 9 in the Purchase and Sale Agreement. Two recent cases decided by the Washington State Supreme Court have given the NWMLS the opportunity (or obligation) to delete line 9. Line 9 required that the parties negotiate whether or not the buyer could sue the seller for negligence in completing Form 17. The new Court decisions now require courts to analyze the facts of each case and decide whether or not the buyer has a claim for negligent misrepresentation against the seller, rather than barring such a claim automatically under the “economic loss rule.” This whole issue of seller misrepresentation and disclosure is a pot of gold for lawyers and legislators. It’s a gift that keeps on giving, but not to consumers, not to buyers. Buyers don’t benefit at all. Amazing. And the whole justification of the law is to protect buyers.
For buyers there is a way to avoid this whole nightmare of whether or not a seller is misrepresenting the property. It is not to rely on a form with simple questions and check marks that can be evasive. It is not to assume anything or to be forced to rely upon the word of a seller you don’t know. The key is to hire a good real estate buyers agent and to hire a good home inspector. It is critically important that your buyers agent has the experience to recognize potential red flags so they can be examined in more detail by a professional. Experience and wisdom will guide you and your professionals and reveal any red flags or potential issues of concern. In other words, if there is a problem with the property, you need to find it yourself with professionals to assist you. That is truly the best and most effective way to buy a home and be protected.
The Washington Seller Disclosure Statement does not protect buyers as intended but buyers can still protect themselves with honest, experienced, and professional advice.
This article was first published in December of 2010, and here we are almost 10 years later and everything here still applies, although I have added a couple of small updates. Now you know about Seller Disclosure.
Possibly Related Posts:
- Seller Disclosure Law in Washington
- Basement Flooding Not Disclosed
- Seller Disclosure Statement and Buyer Beware
- Seller Disclosure Statement – Form 17
- Disclosure Statement for Sellers
Google+
We are in the process of buying a home and the seller has marked everything I don’t know. One question is on
flooding on the property. Ironically it is flooding as we speak so with a picture can we not prove they are liars? Since they clearly said they didn’t know yet they are living through it? They have lived in the home for 5 years, it floods every year, as we live next door. I understnd not getting into someones brain but they live there the property is under water isn’t this a no brainer to prove the lie?So if they are lying on this what else is a lie?
ANSWER: I feel your pain. The Form 17 Seller’s Disclosure Statement in Washington is a politician’s answer to pretending to solve all the voters problems with seller misrepresentation. It hasn’t solved anything. See my articles on “Seller’s Disclosure Statement” or search “Form 17” on my blog.
In Washington State do you have to Disclose that a Homocide took place in the home?
Editor’s Note: No by case law you do not.
We purchased our home and decided we wanted to fill in a irrigation ditch knowing that this ditch was useless but contact them about to see what to do to legally do this. We live out on a small piece of farmland. Well come to find out there is a right of way on our property (we were aware of an easement do to the other ditch) had NO idea there was a right of way. So now we find out we can’t even build on our property plus since owned by the Federal Government they can come in and take all our property if needed. So now what? The BLM has sent us all the legal documents on this and the Realtors act as if they didn’t know anything. Can you tell us what steps to go thru. We are so upset that we purchased this property now. We would have never ever purchased it if we had know this. We went thru a Mortgage Broker and had it inspected plus went thru a Title Company. Yet this was sold to the US and the BLM said we cannot build on our property. So now what? What legal rights do we have!! Thanks for any help you can give us. We thought we went thru all the right channels before the purchase.
Answer: There are at least a half dozen legal issues involved in your situation, and some of them involve very complex legal issues. It would probably be malpractice to even try to answer your questions without spending two hours just gathering all the facts and documents. You need to see an experienced real estate attorney. That’s the answer for now.
After a septic inspection, I realized that there are several things the inspector missed in his report. Since the report doesn’t mention the damage to the septic system, the seller’s agent is saying, “System is fine, functions normally,” and refusing to acknowledge what I have noticed. Is this misrepresentation?
Kevin, hiring a good septic inspector is critical. The answers you get are only as good as the questions you ask, so the inspector must raise the questions (issues) and make a buyer aware of potential problems. Due diligence is everything. Lawsuits are costly, a nightmare of stress, and often a total waste of time and energy.
Please whoever is consulting on here do not tell people it’s a waste of time and $$ to sue these fraudulent people. That’s the reason people continue to lie on form 17s. The more people make others accountable on form 17 the less and less they will lie. Trust me WA state has horrible consumer protection laws. In state of TX if you are caught lying on form 17 you are liable and can be sued. People don’t try it cause the lawsuits are large and do cost a lot.
I suggest always talking to several attorneys and if you feel u have bern lied to by your buyers agent, inspector and the previous owner u need to look into it further. Just because 1 case was done wrongful in WA state shouldn’t keep people from making owners accountable.
Until we all start fighting back we all are screwed and “BUYER BEWARE” attitude will eventually cause potential real estate issues down the road. If I had known it was a buyer beware state I would have passed on purchasing here and moved to a state that cares about its people regardless of real estate frenzy!