|
When a buyer who is not a real estate professional (obviously, most are not) wishes to buy a home and, for protection, enlists the services of a licensed real estate agent, appraiser, escrow officer, etc. to ensure that what is being offered is actually entitled to be sold (i.e. "what is evidently being offered is what will actually be received")... WHO is responsible for determining that any property structure (including, of course, a basic house itself)is in fact legally permitted to be there? Logic suggests (at least to this enquirer) that this responsibility falls squarely in the lap of an applicable real estate agent or brokerage and perhaps the seller as well. After all, any situated but non-permitted structure actually may just conceal "a vacant lot" because, when duly discovered by appropriate authorities,it can be (and quite possibly will be) ordered summarily removed. That could include any number of things --- even something as basic as a house, itself. Thus, confirmation of all necessary permits pertaining to any real estate transaction are in fact a very big deal. But nobody seems to mention them to prospective buyers and the ramifications of lacking some. Which begs these questions:rnrn1. Who bears the ultimate responsibility of revealing to a prospective buyer any permit issues regarding a proffered sale?rnrn2. Assuming it is only the buyer ("ignorance of the law is no excuse"), then WHO is responsible for ensuring that an otherwise unsuspecting buyer is at least fully informed of the serious dangers inherit in buying any real estate without confirmed permits in place?
Reply
|
