What did your contract say, re. inspection?

You need to be more specific in regards to the repairs and the lot size to get some advice.

How much value is in the lot? Ie how are you figuring out what the lot itself is worth without the house. In general it is a package and unless you are in an area where there is very high land prices or there is a lot of acerage involved I don't see that this being that large of a difference in your price.

I think more info is needed to make a meaningful reply. Generally speaking, I would expect some renegotiation on due to major repairs that effect safety, function or habitability of the home or could cause a major expense in the near future More than that tend to be pushing things. As far as lot size, if this was a typical residential lot and you could see the boundaries, there is a certain you see what you get factor. Also, the majority of the value is in the home, so how you would factor that in is questionable. I can't even get a firm handle on the variances in values in our neighborhood where some of the lots are about double the size of the others. The tax folks don't seem to think even a double size lot makes much difference. On acreage, the variance would be a different issue. Doesn't sound like there was a representation that makes the property unsuitable for your needs.

I'd stick to the repair issues and decide whether you really want the house -- assuming you have an option or contingency for that inspection and have a right to back out.

It sounds like you are approaching this very reasonable. Is the square footage of the home different or the lot size?

Comp info on houses of similar lot size and square footage?

He is either agree to your new price or you will have the choice to walk away if there is a contingency. I don't think you are being unfair in asking to renegotiate the price.

Lot size is an important differential. This home sale by owner is taking a chance by putting out his/her own information that isn't correct. You agreed to buying what was stated, and inspection shows differently.

We just sold a house. The inspection came back with some items and we (as sellers), fixed them. I think it is reasonable to include in the negotiations that things are fixed or price is adjusted based on inspection. We only dealt with a two or three items, so a laundry list is a bit more, but the sentiment is the same. They need to sell that house, and you need it to be right for you to move into it. Negotiate to get that stuff fixed.

So the important thing to ask yourself about the lot is: if the square footage of the lot was correctly published would you have still made the same offer? In other words was part of your offer contingent on the square footage of the lot? If you would have made the same offer if the lot were correctly advertised then no you should not expect a discount. Although lot size has a major effect on property values, it is not necessarily a linear value. I mean a .5 acre lot and a .45 acre lot are virtually the same to buyers.

Odds are that you didn't view the property based on the lot size. Nor did you make an offer based on the lot size. So in a sense you are finding a reason that the buyer messed up and thus you are entitled to pay less. I would be somewhat miffed myself. He probably feels that you are just looking for a reason to offer less money. Having said all this, if it really does effect the value then by all means you deserve a different price.

I think what others have said re: lot size is correct.

As to your list of items in the house - I just sold a house. They asked that two items be fixed. I fixed 4! (I found two things after the inspection that I felt needed to be fixed and just did it). So I think sellers expect to fix a few small things, like a window that doesn't open, a drain that is slow, a garage door off its tracks. They expect to fix it, not have the buyer pay less.

If it is the roof gone bad, or the furnace at the end of its life, or a foundation problem, then maybe renegotiate the price.

Good luck! Let us know how it turns out.

What Bry911 and LascaTx say...

As someone w/ small urban lot - 10% less land would be significant for me, equivalent to 350 sf ... or the size of a 10 x 35 garden! Not insigificant... esp if you are an avid gardener! You talk about the seller being miffed. Well the buyer is plenty justified to be miffed tooI

I assume it was a typo or innocent mistake, but still. Yes, when I make an offer I am looking at the stats AND I'm relying on my impression of the place when I saw it. It doesnt matter if visually I couldnt distinguish the exact square footage by looking at it. That's what the stats are for, to inform me in my decision making. Visually I would certainly notice if I had 3500 square feet and then from that, I measured out 350 square feet and was told I had to give it up.

Seems to me the starting point of a conversation or negotiation could be to look up the land value in the appraisal that was done prior to the house being sold and see what that was based on, how many square feet. And go from there. At the very least split the difference with the seller.

That said... the bottom line may be how much do you want this particular house and how much are you willing to overlook to get it. Good luck!

Sorry all, was offline and doing tons of research. The lot is residential and was listed at 22,000. This is PRIME where we`re located and definitely has value even though it may seem trivial in a more rural setting. The bigger issue though is that the seller claimed that the house had R2000 certification. In Canada that`s the early version of what a LEED building would be.

We based our offer on that in *large* part. Turns-out he never had a certificate and the house is not the superior value we based our offer on. We've had to tally all the work to be done in the near future because of his apparent complete lack of general maintenance & have submitted a revised offer. He basically advertised organic ahi tuna and tried to sell us some carp.

We've found the FSBO experience from the buyer's side very disadvantageous. Its basically all the work is duped in your lap so that the seller can save the commission but I'm not sure we get any value from that on the buyer's end.

Wow what a scammer. One error, OK. A series and it starts to look like a pattern of intentional misrepresentation. Well good for you for catching on. Good luck with the deal!

While the lot size may have been an accident, falsely claiming a certification doesn't seem like it could be unintentional.
I'd just back away from this deal. Who knows what else he's hiding.

Whether or not you back out of the purchase is up to you. I think the pattern of misrepresentations means that you will have to significantly expand your due diligence. That doesn't make it a bad house, or a bad purchase necessarily, but it may make it more effort than you are willing to put into a deal that may or may not go through.

@ kasha - You talk about the seller being miffed. Well the buyer is plenty justified to be miffed too - the buyer can can back out of the purchase. I would pose that his right to be miffed is limited to whether or not he would have paid for the inspection had he known otherwise. If the answer is that he would have in fact made an offer on the house then there are no additional damages.

Calling foul on the old wide-bristled crank paintbrush! When we were house shopping, the second FSBO was a twenty-something couple that held biweekly open houses and insisted their house was worth their asking price, no matter what the market indicated.

=)

"Old" is a state of mind!

So we got some garbled response basically saying he's lived in it for 12 years and its fine so stop fretting. Huh? $750 inspection down the drain. Lesson learned.

So, this is where you end negotiation "talk" and send an addendum to the contract with your new proposed price based on the info you now have (if you're still interested in the house but at a reduced price, that is). If he signs it, you continue with the purchase. If he balks, you walk. Or, you simply walk anyway and let him start over with a new buyer with whom he may end up in the exact same situation a few weeks down the road from now.

We did send it in writing as specified in our offer to purchase. We even included (also per offer to purchase) a copy of the inspection report for his reading pleasure. We're back to square one house hunting, can't quite believe it after all this energy spent on this particular house. We couldn't have handled it differently given that the guy is possibly not well or at least not living in reality. Next time we will bring a relative who's also a handyman to look at the house before even bothering with the formal inspection. We'll also probably get an agent -though our experience with them as been that they're pretty useless to actually find something of interest UNLESS we're dealing with younger, more proactive and responsive FSBO's. Darn it. Onwards and upwards.

Are you limiting your search to FSBOs for some reason?

Did you send your formal offer withdrawal notification? In other words, does the seller know that the deal is dead?

The wording of our amended offer and the subject to inspection clause covers that. We're not limiting our search to FSBO but its a rapidly growing market in our area so some houses of interest have been FSBO's and we got really unlucky with both our experiences so far (as a buyer).

I totally agree that the FSBO can be split into 2 camps too. We've seen houses listed by people in their 20's who had done their homework and were at the ready with pertinent info for buyers. The others, that failed, have been with 60+ year old's who often don't understand the legality and intricacies of such a transaction. Loosey-goosey and overly emotional is not a dynamite combination when it comes to a major purchase.