RICHARD R. TISEI
Two sides benefit
During a real estate transaction, it is not uncommon for real estate agents to provide various disclosure forms about a home’s condition to sellers and buyers.
The disclosure forms aren’t mandated by any specific law in the Bay State. In fact, some real estate firms refuse to use such forms. But one local Realtor and lawmaker has been trying to pass a law to require all sellers and real estate companies to use one consolidated form that discloses everything from the presence of asbestos to whether a home has been treated for termites. Sen. Richard R. Tisei, R-Wakefield, re-filed a bill earlier this year that would make it mandatory for sellers to sign a disclosure form.
“It just seems … that both the buyer and sellers can benefit by having a thorough property disclosure filled out,” said Tisei, who is the broker-owner of Northrup Assoc. in Lynnfield.
One Realtor group, however, thinks such a law is unnecessary and argues that attempts to craft one comprehensive disclosure to cover all property conditions and issues that are critical during a home sale will be virtually impossible.
“You run the risk of missing something in [such a disclosure form] and then who becomes responsible if the list is incomplete?,” said Joy Conway, senior vice president for government and industry affairs for the Greater Boston Real Estate Board. GBREB is “not planning to support” the passage of the bill, said Conway.
All the issues currently mentioned in the bill are already addressed in the normal course of buying and selling property, according to Conway. “We have a very strong consumer protection law in this state,” said Conway. The law basically requires agents to disclose any “material fact” that could influence a homebuyer’s decision to purchase a home.
“The process is already heavily regulated. Adding more to the regulations is not really needed,” said Conway.
‘Makes Sense’
Many Massachusetts home inspectors disagree and are pushing for a more specific mandatory disclosure law.
“We’re in strong support of Senate Bill 118,” said Donald E. Lovering, president of the Massachusetts chapter of the American Society of Home Inspectors, referring to Tisei’s bill.
In an interview with Banker & Tradesman last year, Lovering explained that one key challenge home inspectors confront is that sellers aren’t always forthcoming when it comes to disclosing information about their property.
“One of the things that I would like to see is … better disclosure from the owners about their building,” said Lovering, owner of Advantage Home Inspection in Newton. “They’ve lived there for a period of time. I, or an inspector, is there for a limited period of time. If you look at a 40-year-old house, in three hours you have to make some determinations on what’s taken place in the building over 40 years.”
The Massachusetts Association of Realtors, which represents about 16,000 Realtors, has not taken a position on the bill. The group’s Government Affairs Committee has not reviewed the proposed legislation, explained John Dulczewski, MAR communications director. MAR has a disclosure form that Realtor members can use if they so choose.
The bill originally came about because public health advocates were concerned about radon. Initially, the bill only included language that required a seller to disclose whether the home had been tested for radon and to present any test results to the prospective buyer. But the bill was tweaked and at least 8 other items besides radon testing were added.
If passed, the law would apply to single-family homes, condominiums and homes with up to four units. In addition to termite treatment, the presence of asbestos and radon, home sellers would be required to disclose the year they bought the property, whether there is an underground oil tank on the property and whether the home relies on a private drinking water source, such as a well.
If the home does rely on well water, sellers also would be required to divulge the results of any water quality tests that have been done. In addition, homeowners would have to disclose any outstanding violations of the sanitary and building codes, or municipal zoning laws, and any pending lawsuit or written claim that affects the tile, use or occupancy of the property.
Tisei maintains that it just “makes sense” to have a seller sign one disclosure form instead of several different forms. “It will simplify the process a lot,” he said.
If Massachusetts passes the bill, it will join more than 30 states across the country that currently have some form of mandatory property condition disclosure. New York is one of the most recent states to pass a mandatory seller’s property condition disclosure. However, New York’s law, which became effective last March, contains a provision that essentially allows sellers to skirt the disclosure. Real estate closings can still take place in New York even if the disclosure forms aren’t completed, but sellers who fail to complete the forms must provide a $500 credit to the buyer during the closing.
In Massachusetts, the Joint Committee on Commerce and Labor will consider the proposed legislation along with about a dozen other consumer protection bills at a public hearing on June 26.
“It’s a good idea whose day will come,” said Tisei.
In addition to Tisei, the other lawmakers who sponsored the bill are Republican Sens. Brian P. Lees of East Longmeadow, Michael R. Knapik of Westfield, Robert L. Hedlund of Weymouth, Jo Ann Sprague of Walpole and Bruce E. Tarr of Gloucester.
