Cut truss bottom chords, hidden defect?

[FGLIN]

Isn't the point of all hidden defect insurances that they should protect the seller against unforeseen expenses?

Yes, but they should also protect the seller, especially since real estate agents usually promote them as protection for the buyer in connection with house sales, but in practice, they rarely or never seem to work that way. It might be good to have a buyer's insurance that could be purchased in connection with the buyer's inspection, which would cover costs to pursue the seller and Anticimex legally and maybe provide extended protection for deficiencies in the buyer's inspection.

 

[Claes Sörmland]

Yes, but they should also protect the seller, especially since the brokers usually emphasize them as protection for the buyer in connection with house sales, but in practice, they rarely or never seem to work that way. Perhaps it would be good with a buyer's insurance that could be purchased in conjunction with the buyer's inspection, which would cover the costs of legally going against the seller and Anticimex and perhaps provide extended protection for deficiencies in the buyer's inspection.

At the same time, one must not forget what insurance companies are actually selling, a sense of security for which one pays a bill. That the customer later actually wants to get money from the insurance is frankly just something unfortunate from the insurance company's perspective, a cost. An insurance that encourages customers to engage in costly and unproductive legal conflicts offers no business opportunity.

 

[Olaf3]

For the thread starter, there is a hidden defect built into the structure, and you just need to report it as a hidden defect.
I have zero trust in Anticimex from my own experiences, but I have received compensation from them for hidden defects. Be prepared for them not to want to help resolve the matter; they just want to make you give up your claim.

 

[sturnus]

@r3jonwah85

and elevating the sagging part will completely ruin the ceiling

It is not necessary to destroy the ceiling under the floor to support the beams. I also noticed there metal angles with labels on them. This and other materials visible in your photos may suggest that the remake was later than the year 80. Sometimes labels, materials have serial numbers, year of manufacture ...

 

[r3jonwah85]

@r3jonwah85

It is not necessary to destroy the ceiling under the floor to support the beams. I also noticed there metal angles with labels on them. This and other materials visible in your photos may suggest that the remake was later than the year 80. Sometimes labels, materials have serial numbers, year of manufacture ...

I think at least a hole has to be made to get to the beams, there is a semi-floating new inner-ceiling underneath that is from 2007 or 2008 when they refurbished the kitchen, contractors then added a new inner ceiling on the floor below, and unfortunately all of that structure is attached to the old one with the current skewed levels which is why the crack between wall and ceiling showed itself when adding load to the other side of the beam (works like a lever).