Duberry's Graphics

Mr [redacted]'s complaint centers on an allegation that he was "lied to on the Disclosure Form" (Sellers Disclosure of Property Condition Form) by Semonin Realtors' sales associates; one of whom represented him, and the other who represented the seller. While Semonin Realtors is dismayed by Mr. [redacted]s dissatisfaction with the services provided, it is clear from his complaint that his allegations and assumptions regarding the role of the sales agents is factually and legally incorrect. As explained to Mr. [redacted], the Sellers Disclosure of Property Condition Form for his home was completed by the seller, not the agents. Mr. [redacted] states in his complaint, "...we feel we were lied to... and "...we feel the agents knew about the issues we were being lied to about on the disclosure and intentionally with held information about the house from us before the sale." While Kentucky law imposes a duty on agents to disclose property defects they are aware of that may affect the value of the home (KRS 324.160(4)(b), he is unable to point to any facts that indicated either agent had anymore knowledge than he did about the property's condition. Further, a review of Semonin's records for this transaction revealed that Mr. [redacted] elected to have a home inspection conducted prior to his purchase. This inspection did not disclose the defects of which he complains, For these reasons Semonin Realtors, has concluded that Mr [redacted]'s allegations are unfounded. Had there been actual evidence that the agent's failed in their duties to Mr. [redacted], Semonin would take responsibility for the error. Regarding the involvement of two real estate agents from Semonin in this transaction, one representing Mr. [redacted], and one representing the seller, this is a well recognized practice in the real estate sales industry. Such an arrangement is legal and is known as "dual agency." See KRS 324.121, regarding the availability of dual agency. A copy of the written response provided to Mr. [redacted] before receipt of this complaint follows below and is incorporated into this response. (Pasted from sent email) Dear Mr. [redacted]: This email will acknowledge that we have spoken by phone on two occasions regarding your concerns with your purchase of the above referenced property, and your claim that the Seller Disclosure of Property Condition Form (SDF) failed to disclose numerous defects existing on the property at the time of your purchase. You also have advised me of your concern that these defects were not disclosed by either the listing agent, XXXXXXXXXX, or your buyer’s agent, XXXXXXXXXX, both of whom were Semonin agents at the time. As you are aware neither of these two agents are presently affiliated with Semonin Realtors. I have reviewed Semonin Realtors’ records in this transaction which include, but are not limited to, the sales contract, the SDF, a water test by Beckmar Environmental Laboratory, your Pre-Qualification Letter for a VA loan, and the closing settlement statement. Although you take exception to the water test results showing no contaminants in the water, you stated that this test was completed prior to closing, however, you did not see these test results prior to closing. Your knowledge regarding the alleged water contamination resulted from a water test your requested and received after closing. The property defects that you advised were not disclosed on the SDF or by the agents are: • Water contamination making the well water unsafe for drinking; • Water leaking from the foundation on all basement walls resulting in mold that was not visible until the drywall was removed; • Mold contamination in the A/C unit, visible only by disassembling the unit. A review of the SDF reveals that question 2, Foundations/Structure/Basement, the sellers answered “yes” to basement leaking and prior repairs. Question 6, identifies the water supply source as “well water” with a water purification system (6(b) remaining with the house. Question 7(a)(6) identifies the sewer system as being a septic tank with a drain field. As I shared with you yesterday, the SDF serves as a “Notice” to the buyer of defects known by the seller and prior repairs that may be indicative of potential defects with the property. It does not substitute for the buyer getting an inspection or exercising whatever due diligence the buyer needs to be make an informed decision about the condition of the property. This is stated on the form in the “Purpose of Statement.” You asked why, Semonin Realtors had not ever intervened or confronted the sellers or inspectors about the deficiencies of the SDF and/or inspections reports. Inspections and SDF are between the parties to the contracts. Neither Semonin Realtors, or its agents are parties to these agreements, and do not meet the legal test of “standing” to bring any actions against these parties, that right belongs only to the buyer. I would also point out that KRS 324.260(9) makes it illegal for the agent to complete the form unless they have prior written consent from the owner. We also discussed the role of the VA loan appraisal process. As you are aware homes financed with a VA loan, require a VA appraisal using the VA's minimum property standards. Besides determining the value of the home, one important purpose of the VA appraisal is to ensure that homes are safe, structurally sound, and free of health hazards. Homes must meet the VA Minimum Property Requirements to be approved for financing. When I researched these minimum property requirements I discovered that it covered mechanical systems, water and wells, sewage and septic systems, and provided that homes had to be free from hazards that “…may adversely affect the health and safety of the occupants….” Again, this does not substitute for the buyer’s own due diligence. Semonin Realtors, expects its agents to exercise the utmost professionalism and compliance with all laws affecting real estate transactions. The law imposes a duty on agents to disclose property defects they are aware of that may affect the value of the home (KRS 324.160(4)(b). Agents cannot disclose what they do not know; you have stated that you have no actual knowledge that any Semonin agent was aware of the defects in the home, and that you yourself only discovered the problems after purchasing and moving into the property. Given this, and the fact that neither the inspector or the VA appraiser discovered these defects, I cannot see how the Semonin agents could, or should, have known about them, and Semonin should not, and cannot be held accountable for any financial loss and inconvenience you may have experienced. Ultimately, if indeed, the Sellers failed to disclose defects on the SDF, it is the Sellers, not Semonin, that is responsible for this failure. Lastly, you have advised me that you have filed a complaint against Semonin with the Revdex.com. The response Semonin will make to any such complaint will be the same as set forth above. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your concerns. Sincerely, [redacted] Corporate Counsel Semonin Realtors