Hauntings or deaths in a home can raise unusual disclosure issues

Q. Your recent Halloween column about ghosts and hauntings left me wondering about something. If someone lived in a haunted house and then went to sell it, would they have to disclose the haunting to a potential buyer?

A. It largely depends on the state where the home is located.

Nearly all states require that the seller of a home disclose any material defects that could affect the price that the buyer might be willing to pay. A roof that leaks when it rains or a faulty electrical system are two common examples.

Many states have expanded their real estate rules to also require that a seller disclose any material facts that could influence the buyer’s offering price — and that often creates quandaries for sellers, buyers and their agents.

For example, if I sold my house to you, I would likely have to tell you if the basement floods every time it rains. Understandably, you would lower your offering price to help pay for the needed repairs. But what if my basement flooded only once — four years ago — and I paid to have the problem immediately fixed? Would I need to disclose that now-solved issue to you today? The basement no longer has a defect, but the flooding that occurred four years ago may still constitute a material fact that could cause you to lower your offering price or perhaps even look for a different home without a checkered past — all of which brings us back to ghosts, real or imagined.

If a seller honestly believes that the home is haunted by one or more otherworldly spirits, it’s usually best to tell a prospective buyer about it. That’s an easy way to help prevent a potentially costly lawsuit later.

Though relatively few states require such ghostly disclosures, it’s worth noting that more than half have one or more laws concerning a death on the property.

Some states require that recent deaths or even small burglaries must be disclosed to a buyer, even if they happened years ago. Talk to a local real estate agent or realty attorney for more information.

Q. Our real estate agent recently showed our house to a man who said he wants to make an offer on our property but not until his wife gets back from an overseas business trip in two weeks. However, the 90-day listing agreement we have with our agent expires in five days. If we let the contract expire, could we then sell the home directly to the man and his wife to avoid paying our agent his 6 percent commission?

A. No. Even if you tried this unethical tactic, you would still have to pay the agent. That’s because virtually all listing agreements have a boilerplate provision that essentially says that the commission must be paid if the agent can produce a “ready, willing and able” buyer for the home. Your agent has apparently done that, so he’s entitled to the fee even if you let the listing contract expire and then try to sell the property to the man and his traveling wife.

Also remember that finding a buyer for a home is only part of a good real estate agent’s job. After the sales contract is signed, the agent then has to help shepherd the deal to a successful close. That often means dealing with lenders, appraisers, home inspectors and the like — not to mention a ton of paperwork that has to be completed and a myriad of potential problems that may arise that could threaten to delay the closing or even scuttle the entire sale. Keep your agent by arranging some type of extension to the original listing agreement. It’s not only the wise thing to do, but also the right thing to do.

Send questions to David Myers, P.O. Box 4405, Culver City, CA 90231-2960, and we’ll try to respond in a future column.