Woman buys $1million House full of mice

[zinfamous]

A few snakes will clear that problem right up.

But it would probably take a while.

 

[twinrider1]

Tonight....on a very special Holmes on Homes.

 

[dr150]

I did a pro inspection on a $150k investment property.

How can you not do it on a house worth $1M.

This is a lawsuit in the making. Just wait for it.

....And the previous owner KNOWS this.

 

[Exterous]

Did anyone mention she should have gotten a home inspection? Because she should have. The stupidity of not doing this is astounding

 

[spidey07]

Owner can just claim he knew nothing about it. She will get nowhere.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Most people will probably disagree with me, but I'm thinking she should have gotten a home inspection before she agreed to buy the place.

 

[Howard]

How many AC's is that?

hahahahahahahhaa

 

[SKORPI0]

At least it's a mice infestation, not a rat infestation. D:

 

[marvdmartian]

If she's one of those crazy old cat ladies, she's all set!

 

[Mide]

no inspection??

 

[T_Yamamoto]

WHO BUYS A 1 MILLION DOLLAR HOME WITHOUT INSPECTIOn!?!?!?!??!!?


the stupidity is astounding.

Women buying homes.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Owner can just claim he knew nothing about it. She will get nowhere.

Even if he really knew nothing she'd still have grounds to sue on the basis that he knew, had a legal obligation to disclose and intentionally concealed it. It's hard to believe that he could not know of an infestation that bad, so she'd have a fairly good case even without direct evidence of a coverup. It would be up to a jury as to whether his claims of knowing nothing would go anywhere.

 

[Ichinisan]

Even if he really knew nothing she'd still have grounds to sue on the basis that he knew, had a legal obligation to disclose and intentionally concealed it. It's hard to believe that he could not know of an infestation that bad, so she'd have a fairly good case even without direct evidence of a coverup. It would be up to a jury as to whether his claims of knowing nothing would go anywhere.

 

[her209]

Tonight....on a very special Holmes on Homes.

I had to read that twice because that looked like it read:

HOLMES ON HOMIES

 

[pelov]

How do we know the new owner isn't an avid rat enthusiast?

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Really, you need that explained to you? Okay, I'll try to use simple words and maybe your mommy can explain the trickier parts to you when you get a little older.

Claiming you don't know anything is not a bulletproof defense. "Gee officer, I didn't know there was 6 ounces of coke in my pocket". She can sue him and it's up to a jury to decide whether he really didn't know anything. She has a case and his claims don't mean jack shit at this point.

Want me to try it again using only single syllable words? Would that help you?

 

[Howard]

Really, you need that explained to you? Okay, I'll try to use simple words and maybe your mommy can explain the trickier parts to you when you get a little older.

Claiming you don't know anything is not a bulletproof defense. "Gee officer, I didn't know there was 6 ounces of coke in my pocket". She can sue him and it's up to a jury to decide whether he really didn't know anything. She has a case and his claims don't mean jack shit at this point.

Want me to try it again using only single syllable words? Would that help you?

Calm down, brother. You do not do His noodly appendages service.

 

[spidey07]

Even if he really knew nothing she'd still have grounds to sue on the basis that he knew, had a legal obligation to disclose and intentionally concealed it. It's hard to believe that he could not know of an infestation that bad, so she'd have a fairly good case even without direct evidence of a coverup. It would be up to a jury as to whether his claims of knowing nothing would go anywhere.

Ok.

Now prove it. I've sold many homes. Prove it.

I have signed document under penalty of fraud. What does she have? Any documentation?

Put me on the stand. I knew nothing of this and have this signed document to prove I knew nothing.

 

[Leros]

Buy a few pythons, problem solved.

Then she'd just have a million dollar house full of pythons. Although... if we continue this process... it just might work considering that humans are at the top of the food chain.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Put me on the stand. I ... have this signed document to prove I knew nothing.

Oh, I don't think we need any documents.

 

[spidey07]

Oh, I don't think we need any documents.

Buyer also accepted this as fact. Unless you can prove I commited fraud, she doesn't have shit. This is her lesson in the stupid tax.

Read what you sign, buyer beware.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Wow epic fail, how could she not get an inspection.

And I thought the 6 mice caught so far in my house was bad. D:

Though with that many I'd see it as a fun challenge. Ammonia and Bleach and GTFO sounds like a good start.

It's also sad to see that our justice system is getting as bad as the US justice system. Did not figure a lawsuit like that would fly especially considering the owner did not know about it.

 

[highland145]

At least it's a mice infestation, not a rat infestation. D:

Mice breed a lot faster.

 

[Nintendesert]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/11/04/mb-house-mouse-infestation-winnipeg.html



Having had a mouse infestation once, I have a good idea of what she is going through.

GJ on the home inspection rich dumbass. I bet she also skimps on buying fire/smoke alarms. :sneaky:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Forsythe said that after she bought the home in May, the previous owner and his family were still living there until she took over possession in September.

Forsythe said she did not get the home inspected before purchasing it, but she did go in with contractors, engineers and architects several times before the handover and no one noticed anything wrong.

When opened up; the place stank; did it stink when she visited the house and others?

Apparently not.

If the sheetrock was able to conceal the order; the previous owner is off the hook.

Ari Marantz, a certified home inspector in Winnipeg, said a proper inspection might have caught the mouse problem, although it is not normally on the checklist.

And that she chose to not have inspections and no one on her team noticed anything during visits, she is more at fault and the burden of proof is on her to PROVE that the previous owner knew of the problem.