alan6051964 said:
OP, there is only one thing that would bother me over this deal ?. IF signed the bill of sale, and on this bill of sale, the words '' AS IS, NO WARRANTY '' is anywhere on the bill of sale ?, well, your up chit creek, leaky boat, no paddle :-(. reason being is, once you sign that bill of sale that has those words on it ?, you clearly, without further judgment, knowing, fully aware, have agreed to said property '' AS IS. NO WARRANTY'', made the purchase anyway. I know this sucks !, but in the legal world, those few words maybe small ?, but they carry a lot of weight in court. now, if those words are not on the bill of sale ?, then you have a solid case of fraud !.
[/quote
No bill of sale, maybe good thing maybe a bad thing. Nothing was ever said about "as is"...Unfortunately its all he said she said. I'm probably have to eat this although it will only cost me $85 to make a fool out of myself. I see it all the time on court TV?
Incorrect, In one of my earlier comments in this post, I stated that I sold a rental home thru a realtor in the last yr or so. You can sue for anything. The buyer was trying to say that I knew of plumbing issues prior to the sale and sold the home with this knowledge. The buyer never inspected the home and signed off on that. The case had legs in regards to did I have this knowledge and sold a lemon per se.? The prior knowledge issue is big, "as is" or not.
Either way, the cost of an attorney for the seller (unless he wants to tackle it alone, which he would be foolish) because obviously he has to answer wether or not he knew anything. Costs and answers the seller needs to face here are pretty lengthy, hiring an attorney or not, a few days off of work, possibly ripping off older people,extensive pictures of years of damage, an installed air vent to obviously cover something up, calling the buyers financial institution and poking around, lying on phone calls, offering to give the money back at one time or another, are all things the seller has to answer to. Putting his feet to the fire could get him to just back off and give the money back. The judge is going to hear this and have reaaaall doubt about the buyer not knowing anything about the prior damage. The judge in my mind will see through the bs and probably just ask the question, "Mr buyer how do you want to remedy this" and when the words said are "I just want my money back" is spoken, the judge doesn't really have to rule or make a decision on anything here, he is simply a mediator and thats why you would sue.