A house with 18% moisture in the base plate that was replaced 9 years ago, to buy or not

[hempularen]

I interpret (with some difficulty) that the drywall is on the outside of the framing, and that the inspector believes there should have been some type of asphalt-based moisture barrier there. I don't know enough about sill replacements in 1970s houses to have a proper opinion. But I haven't heard of placing a moisture barrier between facade brick and the load-bearing construction. Possibly if this were below ground.

But the fact that there was apparently moisture on a drywall is serious. Gypsum (the paper on the surface) molds quite quickly if exposed to moisture. It's a bit odd that the board is still there if it has been exposed to moisture for 9 years.

 

[Mikael_L]

I voted no.
But I don't see it as completely impossible to buy the house, but then you need to familiarize yourself with a lot of things and probably very quickly.
And then you should be prepared that all measures could cost a million. Not certain, but right now it's probably not possible to make a good enough assessment to know if it will manage with 300' or 1,000'.

A friend of mine (only) had to replace all the foundation, the bill ended up at around 300'.

But in summary:
If your bid is at a level suitable for a relatively faultless similar house, then it may be appropriate to lower the price by at least half a million (a big gamble) or a whole million.
And prepare for a long and tough renovation journey with an almost uninhabitable house at times.

Or you can make sure to learn a lot more, gather more info, investigate further, and possibly get some rough price estimates from contractors.
Then the purchase price can be negotiated with a bit of a better basis.
(Possibly a lot of extra investigations could also lead to the conclusion that the issues aren't actually that severe, but from what you've described, I don't believe so.)

Or you take the house for the plot value, demolish, and build new.

Or you skip it altogether, for simplicity's and peace's sake.

Just the fact that you've started the thread shows that your gut feeling is sounding an alarm, and it's surprisingly often right to listen to your gut.

 

[Huddingebo]

Sills that have been in use for a few years should have less moisture than the 18% that was measured and that new wood at the lumberyard can have. But does sill wood really mold/rot? Isn't it treated? My sills are from 46 and completely intact/fine while an adjacent board in the basement (a previously moisture-exposed corner) was very bad.

Regards

 

[ChrisseE]

In the seventies, pressure-treated wood of lower quality was often used for sill plates, which turned out to be a bad idea with dangerous odors and so on. Today, pressure-treated or treated wood is not used for sill plates. It is also not necessary because with the right construction, the sill plate should not become damp.

 

[Huddingebo]

Ok, so today do people use regular std lumber as sill timber? What do you think was used before the 1970s? It looks like mine are treated with something.

Regards

 

[MSjöström]

Ok, so today you have standard lumber as sill timber? What did they use before the 70s, do you think? It looks like mine are treated with something.

Regards

Earlier years I've seen with pressure-treated sills are -69. However, I've seen houses built earlier where they've painted wood protection treatment - like cuprinol - on the sill. Could it be that?

 

[ChrisseE]

In the past, you could smear just about anything on the sill; I've seen everything from waste oil to paint when I've torn down old houses.

 

[Eddi Thomason]

In the past, people used to smear just about anything on the sill, I've seen everything from waste oil to paint when I've torn down old houses.

Maybe some old railway worker who used creosote-impregnated materials!? :-|
Back then, people probably used just about anything...

To TS: Choose another house. If it's not possible to find out the exact extent of the damage in advance, it's also not possible to estimate what it will cost to fix. And it must be addressed!
A bit of Russian roulette with such a house purchase!

 

[lycksalig]

As I see it, this is a complex moisture/mold problem that can take a long time and a lot of money to fix. As someone wrote earlier, it might be easier for a "beginner owner" to choose a house where it's clearer what needs to be fixed. (For there's always something with old houses...) My sister became very allergic to mold as an adult and hasn't been able to stay indoors at our parents' house for several years. Her face swells up, and her airways tighten so she can't breathe. These allergies can develop at any time in life, but you really don't want to expose any potential children to that risk. Waiting to address confirmed mold is not an option. (Not that TS has mentioned this as an alternative either.) But it can become very problematic if you're in the midst of remediation/renovation and the money runs out. Then you have a house that can't be lived in, can't be sold, and all your capital is tied up. Not exactly a dream situation. But now I've painted everything negatively. It could also be that the problems are small and relatively easy and cheap to fix. If this truly is the dream house, my advice is to hire a true expert who can give a more qualified guess on how extensive the remediation/renovation work (and cost) will be. But it might be urgent if you only have days to back out... Tricky. Wishing you good luck in any case!

 

[tiborric]

There was no plasterboard under the sill. When the sill was replaced, they sawed away the asfaboard and placed plasterboard instead...

/T

Placing a plasterboard under the sill is a completely pointless measure. As the person above writes, BCR should reasonably have a warranty obligation towards the current owners; however, this obligation disappears if you purchase the house.

You have three or possibly four options:

Either you try to get the current owners to push for BCR to address their shoddy work. This will surely be difficult to accomplish and will take time.

You agree that it should be fixed by the current owners before purchase. The problem with this is that you have no control over how the work is done, and the risk of shoddy work is likely high.

You request a price reduction that covers your costs. The problem with this is that it's very difficult to estimate this cost, as there might be issues in many more places.

You withdraw. The simplest option and, in my opinion, the best in this case. If you're buying your first house and have limited knowledge, you should make it easier for yourself rather than buying the first one available. It's very possible that there are more houses with the same potential for moisture problems as this one, but many houses from the 70s have replaced sills and still work today.

 

[tiborric]

Thank you for all the answers and opinions. We have backed out of this deal... The house was sold on 19/12 to someone else... The mistake I made was sending the inspection report to the realtor... Can we trust that she won't "show/give" it to the new buyers or sellers? The answer is perhaps obvious...

 

[sir_daniel]

Do you feel that you want to ensure that the new owners receive the papers, send the documents to them.

 

[geekling]

Thanks for all the responses and opinions. We have backed out of this deal...The house was sold on 19/12 to someone else...My mistake was sending the inspection report to the realtor...Can we trust that she won't "show/give" it to the new buyers or sellers? The answer is perhaps obvious...

According to 'our' inspector (recently bought a house so it's fresh in my mind), the realtor must disclose that a previous buyer withdrew due to the inspection results. However, they are not allowed to mention the specifics that came up during the inspection. Then, you, as the inspector's client (if you paid for your own inspection, which I assume you did) own the inspection results. The inspection can be transferred (sold) to the other buyers. But then the inspection company must be contacted to change who it belongs to, as in our inspection, it included a 2-year warranty that must be transferred to the new owners.

 

[MSjöström]

If you feel you want to ensure that the new owners receive the papers, send the documents to them.

The original poster did not want the report to be shown...

However, this goes against the requirements that the realtor has to inform the buyer of what they know...
Cannot show the report, but must inform... Extremely difficult balancing act...