This is a business transaction and you are taking this personally. Are there realtors involved?

In my market, a desirable town in the LA area, sellers are receiving multiple offers, so a buyer like this would be dumped quickly and the backup buyers would get a shot at it.

Buyers want the best quality repairs and sellers want decent repairs made at the lowest price ... there will most likely be some disagreement. As a buyer, I would get my own bids and have you discount the purchase price by that amount for the radon and mold. I would want to be sure that they were done correctly.

Thank you for responding. Both buyer and seller have realtors. We've had four mold contractor estimates - Three were within a few hundred dollars and another was $4500 higher than the others. We didn't choose the least or most expensive, but the one that addressed our mild mold concerns and guaranteed their work. Our buyers are unwilling to contribute to repairs or negotiate home price. They're employer is paying for closing costs and temporary housing. BTW, this is not the first house that fell through for them due to home repair issues.

This post was edited by dorothyamelia on Sat, May 17, 14 at 23:35

Sounds like you have found some inexperienced buyers who don't realize that even brand-new homes are not perfect.
And that if they choose to have the seller fix something, rather than fix themselves after closing, then they lose the privilege of choosing how it is fixed.
Good luck.

The inspection is supposed to be to catch substantial problems that couldn't be spotted on a walk-through, not cosmetic issues and highly visible things. It's becoming a "let's make an offer and then beat it down using the inspection report as the weapon" practice with the "pending results of inspection" clause. Do major repairs, or reduce price, but not both. Some buyers will try to get you on both ends.

If they don't like the inspection report they have the option to walk or not if there is anything about the report they don't like (unless the "pending inspection results" clause is written to include only "health and safety and structural stability" issues), but they don't have the option to make you fix things to their satisfaction unless you stupidly wrote a contract like that.

The response to an inspection report (and they tend to document every possible flaw to prove they are worth their fee) should be a binding repair proposal from the seller. That is a list that specifies that seller will fix the problems listed on the proposal and that on completion of the agreed-upon repairs, as verified by buyer's agent, a walkthrough, submitted repair invoices with pictures (whatever makes sense) the closing will take place at the price of ____.

The REALTORS should make it clear to the buyer that the buyer does not have unlimited rounds of negotiating what will be fixed or not fixed, and there should be a time limit for this negotiating in the repair proposal, after which you will be free to accept other offers. Don't let them hang on for weeks haggling about the way a closet door hangs and keep your place off the market.

After the repair proposal has been negotiated and signed they don't get to keep dragging stuff out and saying "what about this?" That repair agreement should lead right to the closing table!

NOTE: We bought our NM house out from under a buyer whose tactic was to keep bringing up stuff from the inspection report and re-opening negotiations about price. Fortunately for the seller, the sales agreement had expired as had the numerous extensions and amendments they had been making for various repairs.

Each time we've tried to sign off on the repair requests, the buyer not only questions our choice of contractors but brings other issues to the table that were previously resolved.

This should be managed by the REALTORS. The REALTORS should have a signed contract specifying exactly what repairs are necessary for closing to happen ... and the contract should prevent their revisiting closed issues.

Buyer, unless they are paying for the repair, does not get to question your choice of contractor.

BTW, this is not the first house that fell through for them due to home repair issues.

It sounds like they may have unrealistic expectations about the condition of used houses.

c9pilot and lazygardens, Well said, cannot agree more.

Are you sure the inspect report is accurate?

We sold a house in the past, the inspector claimed the carpet was "worn and needed to replace". In fact we just replaced the carpet two months prior to listing the house, we had receipt to prove. Only two of us lived in the house, we had no pet, the entire carpet was in near brand new condition. Even the buyers thought the inspector report was "inaccurate" - I would use a much stronger word.

If you are not in a big rush, "We plan to redo our disclosure and relist" - sounds like a good plan. "is this what we should expect from all buyers" - No, it would only come from cheap and cluless buyers. In addition, it does not sound your realtor is doing his/her job either.

This post was edited by azmom on Tue, May 27, 14 at 19:10

ajsmama-

Don't mean to hijack this thread, but I wanted to help you out with your well testing. Were the samples tested at the same lab or different ones? Is it currently certified by your state's public health dept. to provide testing? In my state, a detailed (and expensive) inspection process is required every 2 years in order to obtain this- ask to see it.
Where were the samples taken from- a faucet in the home, or as close to the well head as possible? Was the source cleaned prior to collection? Was the water delivered to the lab in a timely manner and kept cold? For our testing process, if the sample is at a temp >6 degrees C, accurate nitrate results are not guaranteed.

Depending on what the lab's testing procedure is, they should provide you with a very clear collection process in order to provide accurate results. Your results will only reflect that specific sample submitted. As we like to say, "crap in, crap out".

Don't mean to say you necessarily did anything wrong, but you may very well be trying to compare apples and oranges.

Thanks but this was many years ago, and I have no idea how their sample was handled, don't remember the lab they used (we did get a copy of report). I believe they took sample from the kitchen faucet as we did also - I think that's standard since concern is drinking/cooking quality (wouldn't normally take sample from an outside faucet).

The fluoride was the tip-off, there was no way the fluoride could have changed like that - from nothing to something (and then back to nothing!). I think the sample they got the report on must have been from a city water supply.

I was just commenting on how the buyer didn't even want to consider there was a problem with their sample/lab and do a retest (even with same lab), just wanted to dig up our well and got mad at us for even testing our own water after their agent told our agent to tell us it was unsafe to drink.

Excellent reply lazygardens.