First, I don’t believe in ghosts. Let’s get that out of the way now.
However, there are plenty of real things (spooky noises, apparent apparitions, movement of inanimate objects) that would freak me out that I cannot explain. Plus, I’m not that comfortable in a new house if I know it has a bad history whether it’s a murder house, suicide, or built on an ancient Indian burial ground
Given that most people would probably find that spooky, and a history of unexplained things happening in the house, would a seller have a legal obligation to mention this to a potential buyer?
Let’s say I buy a house and strange things start happening in it, like doors opening and closing without anyone touching them, seeing weird human-like shapes in the reflections of mirrors, etc. Then I do a bit of research and find out this stuff has been going on for a while and the seller knew about it. What legal recourse do I have if I want to renege on the sale and move out with a refund?
Generally you should disclose anything you know of that could cause someone to change their mind or affect the value of the property. Since some people are turned off by the idea of a haunted house that could affect their decision to buy.
Specific laws vary from state to state, but according to About.com, “In California, sellers are to notify buyers if a death has occurred on the property within the last 3 years.”
So wait for 3 years and 1 day to list the house you killed someone in.
A realtor would probably be safe and disclose it, I’m sure there have been lawsuits for non disclosure of much more questionable things.
Real estate disclosure laws vary from state to state, so the answer is going to depend on what state you’re in. Some real estate brokers have higher standards than state laws for disclosure (some states allow this, some don’t), so it might depend on who was representing the home seller (whether the home was being sold through a realtor or by the owner, for example).
Reputation and historical acts associated with hauntings, I assume.
That is, does everyone else know it’s haunted? Was someone killed there? Suicide? Built on a pet/Indian/whatever cemetery?
It’s not about whether or not the property is actually haunted, but whether the seller knew that the property had such a reputation, that such a reputation would’ve changed the value of the home, and that the seller took advantage of the buyer by withholding that information.
I think it’s kinda baloney, but that’s my Philadelphia Lawyer* take on it.
I am not a lawyer. The term “Philadelphia Lawyer” may be regional. I think it’s used to describe someone who provides a definitive and shrewd opinion on topics to other laypeople. Bonus points if the person isn’t actually an expert on said topic, yet convinces others that he is.
I don’t know about time limits but in PA we had to disclose that my BIL had died in his home when we were selling it. If asked “how” we also had to disclose that it was a suicide (overdose) because that is how the death certificate read. Two of the first people interested in purchasing were OK about the death but backed out when they asked about the cause and manner.
This question actually comes up as far back as ancient Rome. I know it’s covered in Haunted Greece and Rome, but I can’t remember the specifics. I believe the answer then and the answer now are the same: they must answer honestly if asked, but they are under no obligation to disclose the way they would be with physical defects. I am neither a realtor nor a lawyer, and I wouldn’t have the faintest notion of how to find out for sure, nor what happens if the real estate agent does not believe in ghosts but the buyer does.
Sure, but if the buyer didn’t already know about it, it can’t have been much of a reputation, can it?
Another hypothetical: The seller is upfront in saying that the framing is a little uneven, but doesn’t say anything about haunting. The buyer, after moving in, discovers that doors sometimes swing open on their own, and confronts the seller about not disclosing that it was haunted. The seller, meanwhile, acknowledges that doors sometimes swing open on their own, and that’s how the seller first realized that the framing was uneven.
No, a Philadelphia lawyer is ultra-competent and sharp to the point of unscrupulousness. What you’re thinking of is a “Blackstone lawyer,” a self-educated lawyer whose training come entirely from reading Blackstone’s Commentaries.
[Source: Garner, A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage]
I lost a house sale due to the buyers being convinced somehow that it was a haunted property (I have no idea where they got that idea or who told them that - I had no reason to think it was haunted). The house we bought last summer was on the market because the owner had died - we don’t know if he died in the house or not, and don’t particularly care (there are no blood stains, no nooses in bedrooms, etc.). I guess I can see disclosing if someone died in a house, but I don’t see disclosing a “haunting” because that’s so subjective.
Didn’t you wonder what was going on last Hallowe’en when those bus tours with the signs saying Calgary’s Most Famous Haunted Houses kept coming around and driving by so sl-o-o-ow-ly-y-y, and all the folks with cameras were leaning out the windows?
In the case that Darth Panda linked to, the people who were selling the house had reported to Reader’s Digest and the local newspaper that it was haunted. The house was also part of a walking tour.
The majority opinion in the case was that whether or not the house really was haunted, since the owners had widely reported it to be, the value of the house was affected. Also, since a haunting (real or not) and the stigma of the house weren’t something you would find during an inspection of it, those conditions should have been disclosed.
I knew a guy in South Dakota who bought a house where three murders had taken place. I don’t think he knew about it until after I told him. I didn’t like him much anyway.
