National Realty Guild

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/03) */
I 100% disagree with the complaints that *** has filed against my broker, National Realty Guild, and mePlease take a moment to understand why this water damage issue has left no one to blame
First of all, I had absolutely no reason to
believe there was a water leakage in the piping below the garageIf I had seen any type of evidence of piping issues, I would have advised them to not buy the homeWhen it comes down to it, this was a complete unforeseen issue and no one is to blame
During the inspection there was no reason to believe the water spigot in the garage was operating any differently than normalThe inspector tried to operate the water spigot during the inspection and was not able to turn it on and went on to assume it was winterized, which is very common in MNThis was no recommended as a "follow up" or "must do" since the spigot was assumed to be winterizedThere were a few other issues that came up during the inspection in which the inspection company recommended to have fixedWe successfully negotiated for the seller to fix almost all of the repairs stated in the inspection reportIf there were issues identified with the water spigot in the garage in the inspection report, we would have requested for this to be fixed as well
The seller is an investor and never actually lived at this houseHe filled out a property disclosure waiver since he did not know every detail about the houseThat is why I highly recommended the buyers do a full property inspection to better understand the condition of the property
The contracting company re-modeled many parts of the home but did not re-pipe or touch any of the piping components in the garagePlease see the attached document with the contracting company's explanation of the damagesIf this were a portion of the house that was re-modeled under the contracting company, they would have covered the damages under the warranty
After hearing about this issue only days after they moved in I obviously felt terrible and started doing everything I could to get it fixedI immediately reached out to the seller's agent who contacted the sellerAt that time the seller/seller's agent made me believe they would in some way help pay for the damages (such as help pay for the insurance deductible or offer free help from the contracting company)In my text message that *** referred to - I would have provided money to cover some portion of the insurance deductible IF AND ONLY IF the seller/seller's agent would help out tooEven though I legally am not liable to pay anything because this was a complete unforeseen issue, I was willing to help so the buyers could move on and enjoy their homeAfter the contracting company came back and explained this as a pre-existing condition of the home, the seller didn't feel the need to have to pay for these damages
The buyers decided they didn't want to file an insurance claim since there was a chance that their rates would be increasedThey truly felt that the seller or contracting company should have to pay for all of the damages related to this issueIf the buyers can somehow prove that the seller knew of this issue before closing, they could try to make the seller pay through arbitrationBoth my broker and I have explained this to the buyersWe have also explained their option to take the seller to small claims court
Please see the attached conversation on my efforts to get this resolved and my professionalism throughout the whole processI understand the buyers are frustrated but there is nothing more I can do as a realtorThe buyers continue to threaten me and my career so that is why I chose to have my broker, Randy ***, get involved and continue the dialogue with themWe had a positive experience working together and I never would have expected this type of disrespectI wish them the best of luck
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/08/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The text message Tara is referring to does not state "if and only if." In fact, the message is interpreted as a promise one of the three will pay (Tara, the seller, or seller's agent)Each of those parties knew the issue was pre-existing when Tara sent this text message making her new promise that daySince then, there have been no significant changes or findings for the issue at handIn addition, Tara has failed to provide any proof she had a reason to believe the the seller or seller's agent would pay for the insurance deductible or home repairWhen Tara was reminded she promised us that at least one of the them would pay, her response was that she never intended to payTherefore, she has also been dishonest in her rebuttal to this claim as wellTara believes she is being disrespected because her dishonesty and misleading conduct has been publicizedHowever, these complaints are the result of Tara and Randy failing to abide by ethical guidelines and honor their commitments at National Realty Guild
Final Business Response /* (4000, 11, 2015/08/06) */
I never intended to pay for the whole repairAs I stated in my last response, when we first heard of the pipe damage both the seller and seller's agent mentioned they would be willing to help with the insurance deductible if the damage was due to updates performed by the contracting companyAt this time, I was willing to contribute some amount towards the insurance deductible if that was what the seller decidedThen after the contracting company took a closer look, the broken pipe did not occur due to poor workmanshipIt was a pre-existing condition of the home which one one could have seenSee attachment with response
My broker, Randy ***, sent *** an email letting her know of the MN Board of Realtors ethics committeeIf the ethics committee believes a code was violated, they will charge a fineHe also provided her with a websiteSee attachment