I've decided to take this post down. Thanks for the advice, everyone.

pocketrockets06 said:

---

One comment I would add is that 14 piers really isn't a big deal if they were engineered correctly. In the first place in Texas we lived (Lake Jackson), piers was an if question not a when.

You mentioned the foundation inspector had concerns but like what are they? Isn't it mildly possible that the current drought caused some of these foundation issues and not piers installed 15 years ago?

---

I'll respond with more detailed answers tomorrow when I'm in front of a computer. But the main issue is that foundation repair was significant and clearly part of a sellers disclosure. He knowingly chose not to disclose that information.

Obvious answer is contact an attorney. Several post here so let's see if they will stop in.

Next get a foundation guy out to inspect and see if there was problems with the old repair or new damage. If new damage not much recourse.

14 piers is really not a big job for a foundation. So the house did not need major work. For example my house is 2 story and only 1500 square feet. I needed 28 piers just for my house size.

I've dealt with an out of date foundation warranty. The foundation company was happy to transfer for a larger than normal fee of just a few hundred. They want the future transfer fees more than they fear the warranty work.

Talk to an attorney because of the lack of disclosure but expect to get the warranty transferred on the seller's dime.

normaleagle05 said:

---

I've dealt with an out of date foundation warranty. The foundation company was happy to transfer for a larger than normal fee of just a few hundred. They want the future transfer fees more than they fear the warranty work.

Talk to an attorney because of the lack of disclosure but expect to get the warranty transferred on the seller's dime.

---

We already talked to the warranty company. We figured out who it was because it was attached to the 2018 sellers disclosure. They said nope. Not transferring it. The 30 day window has passed.

pocketrockets06 said:

---

To be fair they might have forgotten it, but even if they knowingly failed to disclose it, what's your recourse going to be? They aren't giving you the money back and unless you can prove that the new issues are related to the undisclosed repair, you have no damages to sue for. And by the time you pay a lawyer and go through that process you likely could have made all the fixes you needed for less money. Piers are surprisingly cheap. I think we did our last set for something like 3-400 per pier with an engineered drawing. Unless your foundation has completely cracked through this is likely the better route.

A couple of other points. You've already disclosed that the issues with the cracks weren't there when you bought it and your inspector didn't find anything at the time. If I'm the other guys attorney that's my evidence that this is all new damage due to the drought. I don't mean to criticize because I'd be ticked in your shoes. But I want to be realistic for you.

---

Again, I can go into more detail tomorrow, but my quick, overall response to that is why even have a sellers disclosure at all then?

I've handled cases like this in the past. Feel free to PM me and I'd be happy to discuss.

I think you know what needs to be done, OP, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you probably posted to make sure you weren't crazy. Given the response here, I think you have that affirmation.

I agree with OP. Even if the damage isn't related to the piers, it was still extremely valuable information to know that would be a factor when considering a home. I likely wouldn't buy a home on piers. I would be hot. Sorry you are dealing with this OP.

Non-attorney real estate person here. recourse is going to be litigation against the seller for non-disclosure of a known issue. Their prior homeowners insurance will pay up so don't feel too bad for their BS.

To determine damages, I'd think you'd have the foundation company come perform an inspection and from that, determine what, if anything, would have been a warranty repair if the warranty had transferred.

You will go through way more grief than it's worth chasing a few thousand dollars, which is all that should be needed here barring something absurd, and you may lose as others have pointed out.

Especially if your inspector looked under the house and didn't see any obvious concerns. What were the concerns of your foundation contractor that came out to look?

If you are suing, I would also add their agent and your agent. I know you have a relationship with your agent, but they should have looked at the full history of the house. So should have their agent. I am a real estate agent and pay for insurance for exactly this type of situation.

flashplayer said:

---

You will go through way more grief than it's worth chasing a few thousand dollars, which is all that should be needed here barring something absurd, and you may lose as others have pointed out.

Especially if your inspector looked under the house and didn't see any obvious concerns. What were the concerns of your foundation contractor that came out to look?

---

My issue with this sort of thinking is that we way overpaid for the house if there was foundation work done in the past.

My bigger issue, though, is that we would have never bought this house to begin with. There are two types of houses I will absolutely never buy: houses that have been flooded and houses that have had foundation issues. Regardless of whether you think I'm right or wrong for feeling this way, that's the way I feel. Those are two absolutely non-negotiables for me. And now, we've been deceived into purchasing a home that's had one of those two issues.

Quote:

---

If you are suing, I would also add their agent and your agent. I know you have a relationship with your agent, but they should have looked at the full history of the house. So should have their agent. I am a real estate agent and pay for insurance for exactly this type of situation.

---

Do you feel like you have a duty to obtain disclosures from all previous listings of properties you're helping to buy/sell? I think that's a tough case. If the seller's agent was the same in the previous listing and the subject one, I think there's some liability there though. I had a case once where seller's agent had a plumbing inspection that showed severe problems but it was not disclosed to seller and we were able to recover.

Ducks hit on the biggest issue though in my opinion. What are your damages, if any? If you want to pursue this, you need to know what it's going to cost to fix the foundation (and any related issues) if there's a problem. You need to know that anyway. Maybe you have a claim for diminished value - but that would be tough. You can't undo the deal at this point.

MAS444 said:

---

Prior homeowners insurance will not cover it.

---

Was it not a fraud committed on the property when the prior policy was in place? This is what I have always been told when my client s have discovered obvious hidden bullshi after the fact.

Like I said, I am not a lawyer.

Homeowners generally doesn't cover "fraud" or other intentional acts. There may also be a specific exclusion in the policy for this. Your best shot from a coverage situation would be to make a negligence allegation. Still don't think it would cover though.

RingOfive said:

---

flashplayer said:

---

You will go through way more grief than it's worth chasing a few thousand dollars, which is all that should be needed here barring something absurd, and you may lose as others have pointed out.

Especially if your inspector looked under the house and didn't see any obvious concerns. What were the concerns of your foundation contractor that came out to look?

---

My issue with this sort of thinking is that we way overpaid for the house if there was foundation work done in the past.

My bigger issue, though, is that we would have never bought this house to begin with. There are two types of houses I will absolutely never buy: houses that have been flooded and houses that have had foundation issues. Regardless of whether you think I'm right or wrong for feeling this way, that's the way I feel. Those are two absolutely non-negotiables for me. And now, we've been deceived into purchasing a home that's had one of those two issues.

---

That's all well and good, I certainly would be frustrated as well, but you still haven't provided any details on what your foundation contractor thought was so concerning . Disclosed or not, adding 14 piers wouldn't necessarily be that big of deal or an indication of structural deficiencies in certain scenarios like a remodel. We added around 30 of them to a currently 1300sq ft house mainly because we are remodeling and putting a hell of a lot more weight in the house than what it has long been accustomed to.

Depending on the soil and elevation, it's possible there were no apparent issues when you bought the place and that the shifting occurring now had nothing to do with what you're seeing now. It's possible there are drainage penetration issues that were present that your inspector missed. It's also possible there are foundation issues unrelated to the piers and instead due to the beam construction, especially if weight distribution shifted significantly and you're in a bad drought area with a bad soil profile and/or have an underprepped foundation subsoil. There's a hundred different scenarios, and it probably will matter whether the people you had look at the foundation see something that is a result of that previous foundation work. Short of that, my extremely unqualified opinion is that it's going to be difficult to get damages here, and even if you get them it won't be worth your time.

I say that having gone through a lawsuit that was won against a floor contractor over $10K. If your sheet rock damage isn't awful at this point, you probably come out of this for way less than that, maybe about half just depending on the issue. For that little an amount, it's not worth jumping through a thousand hoops just to get reimbursed or for justice.

If by chance the issues are way worse than 4-5K and land well into 5 figures, I'd be more pissed and willing to sue the inspector than the previous owner, because anything obvious should have been caught.