Building Asbestos inspection before renovation

[gizmopb1]

Got a property that's been in the family for years to sell. Currently rather unattractive and so considering renovation prior to selling.

I 99% suspect this property has asbestos and has termite damage.

Wondering which option you would choose:

1. Sell property as it is
2. Building/Asbestos inspection then
A) if minimal termite/asbestos: renovate
B) if termite/asbestos: sell property as it is


Secondly, also wondering what my legal obligations are if 2B is the case- do I have to disclose this to the real estate agent/buyer?

Personally, I would run very far away from a house with termite/asbestos, except if I were to knock it down and rebuild.

Thanks.

 

[Propertunity]

Wondering which option you would choose:

1. Sell property as it is

Maybe, but then if a buyer finds that you have termites you will get gazundered (most likely) or a collapsed sale.

2. Building/Asbestos inspection then
A) if minimal termite/asbestos: renovate

Be guided by your REA as to what buyers are looking for at the moment. For instance I am seeing many unrenovated properties at the moment, selling for higher than renovated ones. (presumably so people can put their 'own stamp' on the property)

B) if termite/asbestos: sell property as it is

You will need to address any termite issues you find as the vast majority of buyers (other than the Nathan-types) will run a mile....and the Nathan-types will screw the price into the ground

Secondly, also wondering what my legal obligations are if 2B is the case- do I have to disclose this to the real estate agent/buyer?

By law, under the Material Fact part of the Act, you have to disclose to the agent and he has to disclose to the intending purchaser. If you don't want to disclose, then don't get the report/s. You can't disclose what you don't know.

Personally, I would run very far away from a house with termite/asbestos, except if I were to knock it down and rebuild.

Termites can attack any home any time. About 30% of homes nationally have had some form of attack. They can be treated and repairs made. It all depends on the severity and the cost of repairs, to my way of thinking. But, yes, in many buyers minds, they'd run away (and I would not blame them).

Asbestos was only stopped being used in the 1980's. So if the home is over 30 years old, you could safely assume it has some asbestos somewhere. It is not an issue if you don't break it, sand it or drill it. Just paint it and leave it alone. If you need to renovate call in the specialists to remove it first.

 

[depreciator]

I agree.

Nearly all older properties have asbestos somewhere, so that's no big deal. Don't get an inspector to tell you (or anybody else) what you already know.

Don't bother with a building inspection either because most purchasers will not take any notice of a vendor commissioned inspection report.

Address the termites if they are active. And don't scrimp i.e. get it done properly by a decent company and get a certificate or whatever they give you. If it's old termite damage, that's not a big deal. Every house I have ever lived in has had termite damage. If the repairs aren't major, get them done.

I reckon people rarely make money on a reno. If it's liveable, try and sell it with just a tart up.

Scott

 

[Cartoon]

knock it down, duplex/villa/units is your can

 

[marg4000]

Another option is to demolish the house (if it is THAT bad) and sell the vacant block of land, depending on values in the area.
Marg

 

[gizmopb1]

so if say a potential buyer commissions a building termite report and then tells me about the defects, would I have a legal responsibility to disclose to other potential buyers what another buyer found out when I do decide to sell?

thanks.