A house with a nasty surprise
Posted on May 8th, 2008 – 9:31 PMBy James Shiffer
As our able intern Emily Banks reported, an Andover house gave its owners more than they bargained for when the septic system rose up against them. Did you have an unwelcome surprise when you bought your house? What did you do about it?
20 Responses to "A house with a nasty surprise"
The article is wrong. The state is not responsible for reviewing the design of septic systems. The county/city has jurisdiction. The state provides training for designers, installers, etc. but that is it.
Well, the state does approve technical standards for all septic systems and licenses the professionals who install them. So it’s about more than just training. But it does appear to be up to the municipality or county to approve the installation of septic systems. I’ve taken out the offending passage of the story until I can get more clarity on this point.
True, they do set the standards. However, the state does not review the actual design of individual septic systems. You are correct that it is up to the municipality to have ordinances that govern septic systems. This system should have been inspected by the city before the home sale.
Isn’t it sad that there is NO consumer protection for the largest purchase a family makes, their home? Substandard new construction, fraudulent lending, cities that don’t enforce building codes, inferior materials that are not installed according manufacters specifications are all contributing to foreclosure and bankruptcies today.
Cities have sovereign immunity — builders have predispute binding madatory arbitration clauses and legislation to protect themselves from lawsuits, and a ton of lenders made out like bandits pushing many innocent buyers into mortgages that were predatory at the minimum and fraudulent in many instances.
The city of Andover was WRONG in approving that septic system and they should step up to the plate, admit it, and help this young family. I hope this young couple won’t be foreced to foreclosure simply because they bought a house with a mortgage that they could afford only to find serious deficiencies that the city allowed.
So much for the “American Dream”.
The system was inspected in 2003 by the city.
The system failed in 1999 because of a cesspool. The homeowner’s waited four years to update the system. And since the compliance inspection that was done in 1999 TWO homeowner’s owned the home. I am still waiting for soil boring logs that would tell me where the compliance inspection was performed.
The city only did a tank inspection in 2003, they never checked to see if a compliant drainfield was installed. Obviously the city did not spend much time reviewing the design. The city claim’s the drainfield did not fail in 1999. I did not realize cesspools use drainfields. Also we have not been able to find any pipes leading to the drainfield and the tank is buried four feet in the ground and there is no lift station.
This past weekend I found ANOTHER septic tank and seepage pit that the upstairs bathroom drains into.
The homeowner’s, and the city did not verify the old systems were properly abandoned. The clothes washer drains into a grey water tank. I do not think those are legal.
The picture on this page does not do the problem justice. That is a picture of the outlet port. For the septic experts out there I know you know what the inlet compartment looks like.
Anoka county should take a lesson from Dakota County and make it mandatory to provide an updated compliance inspection prior to the sale of the home. The only compliance inspection that has been done is the one in 1999.
The MPCA is so concerned about updating system within 10 years I could have rolled the cost of this updated into my mortgage. Now we are paying for the new septic system twice.
James,
How do you feel about hearing our elected officials lie on television, ala R.T. Rybak?
Mr. Kohnke-
Perhaps you have already looked into this, but the state offers low-interest (~3.5%) loan funding to people who need to update their failing septic systems. The story mentions that you are paying for the work with credit card debt. If you are approved, a 3.5% loan doesn’t solve all of your problems, but it would help.
The program website is:
http://www.mda.state.mn.us/grants/loans/agbmploan.htm
The website says that within Anoka County the program is administered by the Anoka County Soil and Water Conservation District. Thier number is (612) 434-2030. Good luck.
We make too much money to qualify for any assistance. Yet we do not make enough where this is not a financial burden.
Thanks for the advice though.
Just to clarify, the new septic system will run $15,000. However we must gut the basement because the previous homeowner never hooked up all the plumbing to the new tank. That will run about $22,000 if we install a lift station. We are going to lose the lower level bathroom because we do not want to install a lift station in the basement.
Mr. Kohnke-
I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but we used this program and income is not a factor. There is no income limit.
The process is actually fairly simple and is exactly the same as applying for a loan from a regular bank.
I know that most government programs are targeted at “low-income” citizens, but this is not one of them. If you have not already it may be worth it to look into this. Again, good luck!
I hope you got multiple quotes for that project. I also live in Andover. I moved into a 1976 there in 2000. I was told that the system had been upgaded in the fall of 1999. Being young and dumb, I assumed the entire system had been replaced. I later found out that just one tank was replaced, not the drainfield.
Last fall we had fluids bubbling up from the ground. I dug up the tank cover and found tree roots had clogged up the drainfield pipes. I initially had a designer come out and he suggested a mound system. I was then quoted $12,000. I had another designer come out and he gave us a better idea (a spot without “soil modeling” where we could do a standard drainfield). I then was quoted $4,000. Granted, this did not include tanks of any sort because it had been replaced in 1999.
I did question how just a tank was OK to be replaced as the whole system was almost 25 years old. The whole thing should have been replaced at that time. 20/20 hind sight would tell be to have any septic system inspected by a reputable installer/designer prior to even putting in an offer. I empathize with you.
Bob,
I will look into that program.
Jeff,
All the quotes came in between $13,000 and $17,000. Unfortunately there is mottled soil everywhere so we do not have a choice.
You have to watch out, very few people can be trusted because they know the MPCA and cities will not do anything if they mess up. In our case the MPCA blamed the designer that found a cesspool failed the system then retired the year PRIOR to the installation. I am not sure the designer’s would be happy to know that if they do a design, give that design to a homeowner then the homeowner gives the design to an installer two years later, the design is responsible. Usually designers work with dedicated installers or they are installers themselves.
How does a homeowner find a reputable installer and designer when the MPCA does not do anything? Just because they are licensed does not mean they know what they are doing. It just shows they paid the $100 fee, are bonded and insured and passed a test.
Everyone involved with the system update on our property was licensed. We can not find a drainfield and there are three seperate systems on the property.
I think there should be a requirement that septics be inspected for home sales. We wrote into our purchase agreement that the septic and well be inspected. Our realtors let us know that the well passed inspection so we thought they must have done the septic inspection too. A couple years later we found out that our septic was not compliant! We checked back with our realtors and they said the septic inspection had never been done. We had to replace our septic system. There needs to be more regulation for sales of homes with septics.
The last thing we need is more regulation. Let me sumarize:
1)Everyone involved with the design, installation and inspection were “licensed professionals” through the MPCA.
2)The MPCA blames the designer who found the cesspool yet retired the year before the system was updated.
3)The real estate agent that represented us did not give us the well and Private Sewer disclosure forms. All we were given were maps which were not corrected.
4)The Department of Commerce is responsible for the broker’s and agent’s license. I have no idea where their investigation stands.
We need more accountability. You want to know why kids walk up and down Hanson Blvd beating people up? No one is accountable for their actions.
Have you had to answer this question from your 10-year old:
Why do we have to follow the rules at school but the city and the people we bought the house from do not have to follow rules?
Mr. Kohnke,
I disagree with you. We do need more regulation to avoid this. We need a state law to require spetic system compliance inspections at the point of sale. A true compliance inspection, conducted under recently revised MPCA rules and guidelines by a licensed professional, would reveal whether a septic system is compliant and properly functioning or not. Prior to the revised MPCA guidelines, there were a host of problems that would not be revealed by a compliance inspection. Realtor associations have lobbied against this requirement because they don’t want failing septic systems to hold up sales. This is exactly the reason the state should require them. Home buyers need to be aware of what they are buying. Regulation at the State is the only way to do this. If it is left up to local governments, e.g. Cities and Counties, it will not get done.
Our home has a septic system as does most of our neighbors. However, before we bought our home, we paid to have a professional inspect the system and tested the well for leakage and for contamination. The cost for this was negligable considering we the expense of owning our home. It is understandable to take issue with the government, but the homeowner has some responsibility in making sure that the property they purchase is in decent shape. If our inspector made a mistake, we would have hauled him to court in a New York minute.
Ellen Ryan,
Normally the inspector is only responsible for refunding you the fee you paid to have the inspection done. Most inspections cost $300 and in our case to fix the system will cost $15,000. Where do you get the remaining $14,700? Also to take the inspector to court would cost you more than the inspection fee.
There is a recent court case in Anoka County where the compliance inspector failed the system, the homeowner got a second opinion probably at the advice of the realtor and it magically passed. The original inspector claims he was not paid for the systems he failed and he has lost business. Did I mention the MPCA failed one of the systems as well?
We purchased the home knowing a permit was pulled for the septic, the inspector was “licensed” and there is no benefit for a city inspector to fail or pass a system. They are supposed to be impartial.
In hindsight we should have hired one but a properly installed septic system should last 30 years. When we bought the home the system was only 2.5 years old.
I would take FULL responsibilty if a drainfield was installed, the other tanks were properly abandoned and the real estate agent gave us the private sewer disclosure. However we were living in Iowa when this system was updated, how it can be our responsibility makes no sense. It just goes to show city permits are worthless.
Engineer,
How is more regulation going to help? There were already NUMEROUS laws in place to protect my family and I.
The real estate agents will simply choose a compliance inspector that will pass the systems and if they do not that inspector will lose business.(see Anoka County court case).
The better solution is to hire your own inspector at the sellers expense but that still does not guarantee the inspection would be a good. However if you tell the compliance inspector they will lose their license for 6 months for passing a non-compliant system and they are responsible for bringing the system to compliance the buyer would probably benefit from the inspection.
Currently, the inspector will only be responsible for the cost that they were paid for the inspection. It is then up to the buyer to seek damages from the agent and seller who will simply say “we are not septic experts, we relied on the compliance inspector.”
You should have seen the dumb look on the sellers face when I asked him why he did not hook up all the plumbing to the tank that was installed in 2003. If the clothes washer would have been connected to that tank they would not have lasted 2 years. Even the arbitrator stated they relied on the installer and the city to make sure our system was compliant.
Accountability is the key, in the end all they want is money. It is time for the MPCA to relinquish licensing responsibility to the Board of Architecture and Engineering. It may not be the best solution but it cannot be any worse than the current system.
We purchased an 18 yr old home and had numerous issues. The house had a pre-sale inspection, so we did not get one of our own. It had addressed several items, that we confirmed were fixed.
There were several others that were never noted in the inspection and not disclosed by the seller, such as the crack in the foundation that slowly seeped water into the basement, requiring us to tear out all carpet and part of a wall when we moved in.
They did not disclose that the deck and screen porch did not have concrete footings below thier support posts, which were only burried approx 12 inches below grade.
They did not disclose that the sprinkler system was not up to code, nor did it work properly.
They also left out that the water softener was not working correctly, so the salt I filled it with the week after we moved in, was still full six months later.
All of the appliances needed replacement as well since anything that was put in the refrigerator, was summarily frozen and a frozen pizza took in excess of 30 minutes to cook.
We signed an arbitration agreement. Our realtor’s attorney said, don’t bother the fix would only be about $12k and you were planning on replacing the carpet and deck anyway. Our response was - not yet, probably not for a few years in fact.
We contatced the sellers and told them of the issues and offered to settle for half the amount we got bids for, vs going to arbitration, they fought back and paid nothing…
I have been told numerous times that if it is not disclosed and the seller knew of the defect - then they are liable.
There was evidence of all these issues after we were forced to take a closer look that they were well aware of the defects and no disclosure was made.
I will not sign an arbitration agreement again, since it is a useless document that only provides the realtor with an excuse to turn you away from submitting a claim!
Jason M,
A home buyer does not need a real estate agent. All they want is the quick sale and the commission. You are better off asking for the agent’s commission to use at closing and hiring a real estate attorney to go over the documents with you.
We were also told that sellers are responsible, however it is EXTREMELY difficult to show they knew what was wrong. In our case a city inspection was done AND they hired a licensed installer. By doing that I would not hold them responsible. However if you look at the documents that were not given to us we would have easily known something was wrong with the septic system and well.
The seller had the drainfield in the wrong location(water does not go up hill 90 ft without a lift station) the date of installation was not correct and they did not know how big the drainfield was. If you are updating a cesspool a drainfield would have to be installed and since he was the homeowner he should know how big it is.
They also failed to disclose the abandoned well.
Buyer beware and DO NOT SIGN AN ARBITRATION AGREEMENT. I doubt it would have cost us $30,000 to go to court to fight the fact we were not given the documents. In fact the attorney for the broker wanted to settle for $12,000 if I took the broker and agent’s name off the demand. He stated I could still hold the hearing against the sellers and ask for the full amount, which could have given us $35,000. Hindsight of course we should have done that.
Bob,
I just wanted to thank you for pointing out that loan program. It is amazing after two years no one at the city or county mentioned this program. It is not obvious that a homeowner that does not own a farm can apply for a farm loan to fix a septic system but we will take it.
Currently Anoka county does not participate in this program.
Please leave a comment
Your destination for righting wrongs, uncovering injustices big and small and holding people, companies and government accountable.
A comprehensive resource for finding out about your community.
Special Reports
Continuing coverage
Why did the I-35W bridge collapse? How do the victims and Minnesota move forward? Stay on top of the latest.
Subscribe to Whistleblower
Learn more about RSS
Complain here!
Other bloggers and columnists who can help
The Star Tribune investigates
Categories
- Aging infrastructure (2)
- Businesses in hot water (7)
- Buyer beware (7)
- Complaint sagas (13)
- Dangerous products (4)
- Government spends your money (12)
- Home improvement (3)
- How to blow the whistle (6)
- Neighborhood nuisances (4)
- Problems on the job (2)
- Property problems (10)
- Public records (16)
- The rich get richer (1)
- Whistleblowers (2)