20 Responses to “A house with a nasty surprise”

» Next comment page »

1. septics Says:
   May 8th, 2008 at 9:52 pm

   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.

2. James Shiffer Says:
   May 8th, 2008 at 10:02 pm

   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.

3. septics Says:
   May 8th, 2008 at 10:55 pm

   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.

4. Nancy Says:
   May 9th, 2008 at 1:04 am

   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”.

5. Eric Kohnke Says:
   May 9th, 2008 at 8:46 am

   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.

6. Robert Grant Says:
   May 9th, 2008 at 9:26 am

   James,

   How do you feel about hearing our elected officials lie on television, ala R.T. Rybak?

   rt@minneapolis.org

7. bob Says:
   May 9th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

   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.

8. Eric Kohnke Says:
   May 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

   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.

9. bob Says:
   May 9th, 2008 at 2:39 pm

   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!

10. Jeff Says:
    May 9th, 2008 at 4:22 pm

    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.

» Next comment page »

Leave a Reply