Once your windows are torn out - they're gone...your house will never look the same with "new" windows. The muntins are different/thicker wider to hold the double glass. I almost took my original remaining windows out (half of mine had been replaced with the vinyl ones with fake muntins when the previous owner was selling)) and thank goodness I slowed down and started reading and learning about how to fix the originals. I was a bit daunted because I knew nothing about it. Replacing broken glass and reglazing is not difficult, but it's sort of tedious.

Maybe take your measurements to a big box store and get a quote on their cheapest wood true divided light window and then at least you know the bare minimum it will cost to replace them, for your negotiation.

I live in Canada where windows cost an arm and a leg...but I got a quote from Anderson to replace one window (which I ended up repairing myself) and it was $6,000

You arent going to like the price on quality windows . To do this right, you are looking at several thousand dollars which probably means you will end up going with low end vinyl windows. Cheap windows will not last and you will need to do another round of buying new windows in 15 years or so. Repairing these windows now means you can have time to do the right research and decide on appropriate windows at your leisure.

As you do not even own this home, this decision is more involved. The seller has an interest here and so does your lender. With the current condition of those windows, the house isnt going to pass FHA inspection. if you are buying for cash, you can negotiate a seller credit and move on to buy the house. If you have a lender involved then life gets more complicated. At this moment, the windows are the sellers property and your bank isn't going to want to lend money based on the house feature that is not yet been done.

In my area, it is quite common to renegotiate the terms of a sale based on the results of the Home Inspection. Talk with your real estate agent about the typical approach to these issues in your area.

Thanks for the advice! Repairing them myself is not an option. If I can’t pay someone to do it, it won’t get done, as I am a single mom of four kids with a demanding professional life. I have good connections to get things done, but do not have weekends that I can spend restoring windows.

Lyndee Lee--do you mean several thousand dollars total? I can handle that kind of expense...more than about $10K makes me want to run the other direction. I am hoping to be able to work a deal with the sellers. They know I am getting quotes on windows due to the inspection , but I don't think they realize the challenges they will have getting a buyer who won't need to pass a loan inspection. I am hoping that they will be willing to give a little on price if they realize most buyers--not just me--will need something done about the windows.

The idea that your home will "never look the same" is a bit of a fallacy. Besides the fact that there are replacement windows that can look nearly the same, there are sash kits that can exactly duplicate the look of your windows if you excluding the idea that there will be some additional tint and reflectivity to newer style glass.

Progress is a good thing here and if you have any concerns about the look, get some restoration quotes and then you can make an intelligent comparison vs. the conjecture that is heavy on the internet.

The idea that older is better is a bit of a false narrative. I will take aspirin over drilling holes in my head or sacrificing a chicken any day. Updating the efficiency of your home should be measured by the same effectiveness vs. historical accuracy.

I definitely agree that older is not always better...not too sure where you got that from. However not all "new" things/ideas are better either...as the test of time tells us that they aren't (ie asbestos)

I live in a 1947 home with mostly original windows, except for a butt ugly aluminium one in my daughter’s room.

They were in poor condition when we bought our house 12 years ago. We did not want new windows as what was affordable for us was not going to be aesthetically pleasing. We chose to have two broken windows repaired immediately. The frames weren’t too bad so we just had glass replaced. Cost was reasonable. Since then, we have just tackled one window at a time as money has allowed. We chose to restore and I’m glad we did. Yes they are still single pane but I live in a temperate climate and have no indoor a/c. My heating costs don’t seem much higher than friends with newer windows.

We did install one new large custom double-paned window in our kitchen that wasn’t existing before. It was a big splurge, over $5K, as we wanted it to match old muntins, etc. Ironically the seal failed a year later and one by one the six panes in this window have filled with condensation and the manufacturer filed for bankruptcy so no redress.

I’d try to negotiate with seller to replace broken paned windows and a price reduction due to state of the others.

Use that money to fix other windows over time as you can. Just ensure the sill and frame damage has not led to hidden moisture/rot problems.

New windows have a different look, especially at the lower end of the price range. There is an older house in my area where the owners put in several new windows, including at the stairway landing. Because of the glass type and position, the window appears to be a hole in the side of the house.

In my opinion, the sellers should be giving a substantial credit if you are willing to purchase the house as is. Did your inspection find several other problems or are the rest of the items just small issues? If the windows bother you, they will bother other buyers as well.

I worked on a house last summer and the home owner was rehabbing his Windows. He ended up lead poisoning his child. He started before I got there and he is still not done. Rehabbing Windows is messy business and is time consuming not to mention a quality storm window will add to the cost of this job. Many like the old historic look but I'd say more would prefer a new window .

I didn't state that folks were claiming that "Older is always" to draft a narrative. I was merely pointing out that restoring the window is not a zero sum gain. As facts would have it, the restoration of the window does NOT:

- make for a more efficient opening (this is often quoted but is incorrect)

- create a more durable opening

- do so at a lesser expense in many cases

- preserve the charm of the opening once you figure on a storm window

What restoring the window does possibly do is:

- cost you a pretty penny (again this must be priced out per application)

- potentially expose you to copious amounts of lead dust as Todd references

- leave you with a wood window that requires regular maintenance

- requires the application of a storm window to create a modicum of efficiency

I am not a "replace at all costs" apologist. If you survey my previous posts on the matter, I very regularly recommend that folks look at a restoration option for window projects when the situation presents it self and the product is of a historic nature.

This is not a simple application of the addition of some bronze fin weatherstripping and some new glazing compound, these sashes require full reconstruction based on the pictures that I see.

In order to accurately compare the hard costs on the two projects, the OP should get a quote on restoration. If it turns out (as I suspect it might) that the cost of restoration is higher than new windows, the point is largely moot. That is where I would start.

" If you want to preserve your home's value, restoring your original windows is a better strategy"

This is a lie. Get some quality windows, with Low-E glazing. Anderson or Marvin.

Any modern window would be better than those single glazed, rotting ones.

I wouldn't say it's a lie but a matter of opinion. In my experience I'd say 95% would prefer new. Usually the only time I rehab Windows is when it is on a historic list or something odd about the window such as curved glass. Owners on a historic list usually do not have much of a choice.

...or perhaps some people decide to rehab their old windows because the thought of replacing them every (20?) years just doesn't appeal to them.

I will address this lie about 'rehabbing' old windows. First the house doesn't have it's original roof, or heating system, or water heater, or appliances, probably not the kitchen cabinets, counter top, or bathroom (I hope not), and hopefully not the wiring.

However, these 90 year old rotting windows are such a charm and an integral part of the home.

It's a folly, and really poor advice.

As for "replacing them every (20?) years just doesn't appeal to them"

The glazing in those windows won't last 20 years, the paint won't last 20 years, they will leak air, and condense in the winter time (if it's in a cold region of the country).

I went to a local contractor supply place today to look at some windows in person and the saleswoman gave me some good contacts for window installers and told me who does and does not mark up window prices and who passes along the builder discount they give, so that was helpful.

They sell Andersen, Ply-Gen, WeatherShield, and Milgard. I’ve heard your opinions on Andersen, but not the others. Are any of the others worth considering?

We used Weather Shield sash replacement kits (which consist of new sash and new jamb liners). Bought them direct from the factory in Medford, WI (less than 100 mi. from where we live) during their Customer Appreciation sale (in the fall). IIRC, it was a 20% savings. We got the wood windows, unfinished & unclad. This was for 6 double hung windows that protected from weather by a large two story porch. If the windows were more exposed, I would have gone with a clad window. Price was quite reasonable compared to the clad Kolbe & Kolbe replacement kit that we had previously installed (on the other much more exposed side of the house.)

Quite a lot of work staining, finishing, painting. Installation was a breeze by comparison.

The Kolbe windows are nice but I'm plenty happy with the Weathershield given the cost savings.

The sash kits don't involve having to remove trim, exterior or interior so that is a huge savings in time and labor. BUT, our exterior trim was all in good shape except for needing some minor scraping, primer and paint. In your case, you need some exterior trim replaced. From what I can see in the pix, assuming the worst is shown, it looks like your sills are in OK condition but they need tending to sooner than later. A couple more years of East Texas weathering (wet & humid) and you're looking at major, major work.

Given the second story, I would use PVC for trim and sill replacements (if needed). No fun doing window repairs hanging off ladder or scaffold.

It's a beautiful house but given that you're a single mom with four kids, personally, I would rethink purchasing it. The windows are going to be a major expense, two stories are the pits from my DIY perspective (I'm living in one now!) and that black roof in Texas is no bueno. Pity that the owners didn't invest some of those redecorating dollars on the exterior. All moot, if you have deep pockets.

Andersen makes some nice options that will not dramatically impact the visual and I agree with the above poster about looking into sash kits. I referenced that about 12 posts above. Those require a bit more skill but are more aesthetically consistent with the look you have now.

I don't know where the idea of replacing 20 year old replacement windows comes from, but if its true...I better make some plans for about a year from now. So far we have nearly 20 year old installs and I haven't gotten a single call.

> This is a lie

So you're saying I'm a liar? When you don't even know me? Then you, sir, are a scoundrel. :)

> The house doesn't have its original roof, or heating system, or water

> heater, or appliances, probably not the kitchen cabinets, counter

> top,
or bathroom (I hope not), and hopefully not the wiring.

The only item you named there that represents the home's outward appearance is the roof. Does anybody here think it's a great idea to tear off an original, repairable slate or tile roof, and replace it with generic asphalt shingles?

Everything else you mentioned is part of systems or the interior, and also a matter of safety and/or current living standards. I'm not going to argue against that. But I WILL go to bat for the windows, and the roof too, if it were slate or tile.

Restored original windows paired with good wood storm windows are nearly as energy efficient as replacements. Actually, 20 years from now, when the replacement windows' seals have degraded, it's quite possible that the original windows and storms will actually be better.

I'm not talking about aluminum storm windows here. I mean the original wood storms that the house was (probably) designed to use. They create a dead air space, just as double pane windows do, but with a big difference: no seal to fail. If condensation gets between the panes, you just wipe it away.

This suggestion assumes that the house originally came with wood storms, and that you still have them. If not, that might change the equation. You can still find shops that will make wood storms for you, but along with other restoration processes, I can't deny that it might get pricey. How this shakes out for you as a homeowner depends on your priorities and budget.

Another factor is how remuddled the house is already. From the photos, I don't think this applies to the OP's house. But you've already done lots of modern "updates," especially vinyl siding, you might as well go ahead and install vinyl replacement windows.

As for lead paint, if your windows have it, the rest of your home probably does too. If its effect on your kids concerns you, and it should, remember that the sashes are only a small part of the picture. Windowsills, baseboards, and other painted wood trim are much more within kids' reach, and new windows won't change that.

Though I'm neither a lead alarmist nor a lead apologist, I'd be concerned that you could get more lead exposure from the dust the replacement window installers raise than from well encapsulated lead on the original windows themselves.

> I don't know where the idea of replacing 20 year old replacement

> windows
comes from, but if it's true I'd better make some plans for

> about a year
from now. So far we have nearly 20 year old installations

> and I haven't
gotten a single call.

And you probably won't, unless the double pane seal leaks and the owners want to get rid of the resulting haze, or a window just refuses to open or close.

I know folks who have older replacements (mostly vinyl, a couple wood, I'd guess from the 1980s). Even though some of them (the windows, not the people) now leak cold air, I've heard no discussion of replacement. Other upgrades are probably more important to the owners.

I have had two people come out to look at the windows today and we are running into a big problem. 11 of the 15 windows are 53-1/2" wide. Many windows don't come wider than 48". They recommended going with twins, which could work for downstairs, but will not allow clearance for egress upstairs. The window installer who came to measure went to the city and talked to the inspectors and said that upstairs bedrooms require 5.7 square feet of clearance. So now they are giving me these options:

1. Do a 48" window and do flat casing around it to make it look ok, not great.

2. Do twin casement windows upstairs to allow enough clearance.

3. Do twin French casements.

Is this just too big of a mess? Should I cry uncle?

You should talk to a restoration company.

You can do anything with new windows if you can spend enough to get totally custom windows, but it sounds like you should seriously investigate having what's there restored at this point.

Restored original windows paired with good wood storm windows are nearly as energy efficient as replacements. Actually, 20 years from now, when the replacement windows' seals have degraded, it's quite possible that the original windows and storms will actually be better.

Wooden storm windows are the worst F'en product ever invented. Yeah, let's see you take them off on the second floor, and get them down a ladder. Even on the first floor - watch your back. Then again, you have to store them - and possibly break the glass. Then you're going to put up your wooden screens. GIVE ME A BREAK.

Seals degrading after 20 years - more FUD - fear / uncertainty / doubt.

Oh yeah, the new windows will tilt inward for easy cleaning.

I did not read the OP's post carefully - most purchase agreements have an escape clause - after the inspection. After reading all this - I advise to find another home. Replacing these windows is a large inconvenience and expense.

So many fallacies (i.e. single pane + storm is as efficient as a newer window) in this thread its getting tough to keep track of. I can promise you that my customers will call if there is an issue with their window beyond a seal failure. They bought a very airtight window and installation process and they would (and have) called to see that the window is still performing properly.

To the OP's (original poster's) question...there are companies that will go outside of the 48" max width depending on the height of the opening. Search around and you will probably find one of the manufactures that can accommodate that larger sizes.

I will be happy to address the points that are incorrect if the OP is interested, but I don't know that this will serve her any use at this point.

What brands did they have? I would try to find a brand that can make a 54" double hung, I know Andersen can't do it. I do not like any of the other options proposed, not to mention they are a lot more expensive than a single double hung unit.

davidr, you are pretty much an idiot and either delusional or a liar.

Todd, I'm sure your own opinions and knowledge are also helpful to many people here. I'm also sure that as a professional window installer you have valuable, unbiased views about whether it's better to repair or replace windows.

However, ad hominem attacks don't help anybody. Not even you.

Challenge my ideas as you will. That's what keeps life interesting and helps people learn. However, please leave the unsupported, uninformed, and unwelcome personal evaluations out of it, OK? Thanks.

That said, I stand by the gist of my previous posts in this thread. To best preserve the value and character of an older house, whenever possible repair the windows, don't replace them.

You can use fancy words to support point of view , but in the end it is just that. I think that you are the one using unsupported data, and misconceptions. Clearly you have no grasp on the performance modern of Windows , the hazards of lead based paint and where they are typically found. You're agenda is clear to me and seems to not to take into consideration what the OP is looking for .

DavidR,

I would encourage you to read this thread and the healthy exchange of information as it pertains to your refutable claim that a single pane with a storm window is as efficient as a newer replacement window. There is a ton of good data in there and much of it from a glazing engineer that has forgotten more than most of us will ever know (i.e. Oberon).

Many of your claims are flatly false. That isn't personal anymore than 2+2 not equally 5 is personal.

[https://www.houzz.com/discussions/repair-dont-replace-old-wood-windows-dsvw-vd~2639458[(https://www.houzz.com/discussions/repair-dont-replace-old-wood-windows-dsvw-vd~2639458)

Todd knows lead and some of the disastrous impact that it can have on children and residents that forge ahead with a restoration without conceptualization of what they are getting into. To talk about restoration without clearly educating folks about the inherent dangers of that is a disservice to the possible DIY'ers and the larger home-owning public. That, I think, is the subject of Todd's ire. He can speak for himself though. He certainly is well equip to make his point.

I hate to say it ... but: A home built in 1930 is nothing special. The phrase "they don't build them like that anymore" Us engineers say "Thank god"

It's an old house - probably they should 'drop the blade' and scrape it off. But people cling to the inflated value.

The escalation of home prices is a current phenomenon. It's based on realtors and taxing districts working hand in hand to increase the home prices, thus increase the tax base and commissions.

In reality - this scenario will 'hit the wall'. Maybe in 2068 this 1930's home will begin depreciating. Can you imagine driving a 1930 auto?

That's a bit on the harsh side, I'd say that house is hardly dozed material..

I look at houses from several perspectives:

1. construction industry member.

2. homeowner

3. firefighter.

1. likes the quick construction of the current systems, and the flexibility with available products.

2. likes the openness of current floor plans vs the choppiness of older homes. also likes the lesser maintenance of the current products. likes the character of an older home.

3. hates the current styles of construction. I know that I have at least 15 minutes ore more inside an older home on fire. I wouldn't trust a current home more than 3 minutes in a fire. the lightweight construction methods create a virtual house of cards-the fire burns one card and the rest come tumbling down.

Older is better in some things, not so much in others.

Beyond that, I agree with WoW in pretty much everything he's stated here. An older window restored to it's former luster & glory will look great and perform better than it's current condition. It will NOT, however, perform like a high quality dual or triple pane window with LowE films & inert gases in the airspace. It will NOT be able to keep out a draft with a copper or aluminum fin as well as a newer window with multiple layers of weatherstrip. It will NOT be able to be a sealed dual pane set up, either-the storm window by design has to be able to breathe. It will NOT be even slightly close to maintenance free-you will need to keep up with painting it and servicing more than you would a high quality window made to look architecturally correct.

If you want to restore the old windows, feel free-it will be beautiful. But don't try to hang on to a fallacy like "It's a well acknowledged fact now that single paned windows with a storm are as energy efficient as a double glazed window, and by the time you recoup any "energy savings" by replacing them it will be 200 years down the road."

That's a false equivalency, unless you're referring ONLY to a simple cheap dual pane window with no inert gases or reflective films. And what do you have to recoup? You already will have a lot of money in restoring the old, so you may not have any savings vs new at all. You will have to take into account the maintenance to be done to them over those 200 years-the materials and the labor involved.

So much misinformation on this thread for sure, smh...

https://dahp.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Windows%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Facts%20and%20Myths.pdf

http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=25935

Read the last paragraph on page 6.

The cost to a full rehab and weatherstrip is going to be more than $400. They cost of a quality storm window is going to add to that.

Thank you Todd. Beat me to it. The thread link that I posted addresses all of these supposedly unresolved points in triplicate.

Toddinmn it was written in 2004 so I think all the prices/costs have changed since then. I really only posted these links because there are people on here, god bless them, that totally 100% believe that what they are selling is the solution. And also because I took 8 months out of my life to research all I possibly could about whether to take out my old windows or replace them. Everyone has to take into account their own situation and obviously make their own decisions.

And thank goodness we are all entitled to our own opinions.

Also, though, I was a wee bit offended when it was suggested that people, (perhaps I) , was giving out false information about keeping old windows

...so when we all run into each other on another post about old windows ...we know what to expect and respect about each others opinion

I was going to reply to this thread earlier, but just didnt have a chance to sit down and do so...and then WoW dropped this link

[https://www.houzz.com/discussions/repair-dont-replace-old-wood-windows-dsvw-vd~2639458[(https://www.houzz.com/discussions/repair-dont-replace-old-wood-windows-dsvw-vd~2639458)

which is, in my opinion, the magnum opus of restoration versus replacement discussions. Frankly it was one of the most fun discussions that I have ever had the pleasure of contributing to. And there were so many valid points made...just amazing.

Like the thread in the link, this thread has also drifted into the area of "payback on investment" be it restore or replace; which again in my opinion is really beside the point.

High-end replacement windows, coupled with high-end installation, aren't cheap, they are going to cost a good bit of money and dollar for dollar payback isn't short term.

Hiring someone or company for a high-end restoration also isn't going to be cheap. And again dollar for dollar payback isn't a short term proposition. It is going to take a very long time.

As an aside, I was peripherally involved in the window portion of a home restoration project about 10 years ago that had a window budget north of $300,000 (and at that the window budget was less than 5% of the total reno budget for the entire project).

A portion of the home's windows were restored and a portion were replaced (there was over 1500 individual lites total, and this was for a single family home), and at the end of the project I couldn't begin to guess which windows were new and which windows were restored. No one that I was with could tell the difference at all.

The restoration glass came from Germany and was fabricated exactly as the original glass had been almost 100 years before. The millwork company that made the new windows specializes in this type of project and their work is flawless.

Point being that anything is possible if you are willing to pay for it.

I think that people who are adamantly opposed to replacement picture all replacement windows as cheap vinyl junk that isn't going to last 5 years, and sometimes that is the case, unfortunately, but there are also some very good replacement window's that will enhance the appearance and performance of an older home, especially if that home isn't historically significant. When restoration involves extensive wood replacement and epoxy by the gallon, at what point do the original windows become "Washington's hatchet"?

On the other side, junk replacement, such as going to the big box and grabbing the cheapest product off the shelf and spending an hour "installing" it or jumping on the "WE CAN REPLACE ALL YOUR WINDOWS FOR $99.95 WITH OUR SUPER-DUPER, AMAZINGLY HIGH TECH, EXTRA SPECIAL REPLACEMENT WINDOWS" is worse than worthless.

Ultimately whether it's replacement or restoration it's a personal choice and it's a decision that should only be made after careful consideration of all the options.

Please don't destroy an 1880 victorian with $99 big box windows...but 1960's junk is rarely worth the effort to try to "restore". They weren't any good to begin with.

Forget "payback". If that is the ONLY consideration, then look somewhere else to spend your dollars.

Well, this thread has taken a lot of interesting turns. I finally got a quote from a company that could do the job and make it compliant with regulations. I shared it with the sellers and asked them to have the work done, increase my price by half the quote, and they would take the other half of the expense. They say no and we can terminate the contract. It’s been more than two months of trying to buy this house and I am annoyed. It’s not a perfect house, but I’m not trying to buy a perfect house. I am trying to buy a place for my family to live that is close to all the things we need to be near. This reduces my weekly driving time by four hours and puts us across the street from two of our favorite families whose kids attend school with my kids. That’s the primary reason I wanted to move. Perfect windows are way down the list, but functional, not rotting windows are necessities.

Sounds like a good compromise to me, I'm am happy for you.

Gargamel, I think those of us with an open mind will have a different opinion on a case by case basis and look at a number of factors and the wants and needs of the poster.

That 60' junk is often in good shape, are solid Windows and easy to restore if they are double Hungs.

Sounds like you have some decisions to make about how to proceed. How is the market in your area...seller's market or buyer's market? Is it possible that the sellers think they agreed to a price too low for the current market conditions? Or, do they know that your children are friends with neighborhood kids and think you will be willing to pay more just to get into the neighborhood? The sellers may think you are getting a bargain and that they priced the house fairly for its condition. They are within their rights to insist that you accept or reject the deal as written although they may have difficulty finding another buyer who is willing to ignore the windows. A house that will not pass an FHA inspection can be a bargain if you have the resources of time, energy, skills, or money to make the deal work. But, if you are planning on an FHA loan, you may need to keep looking. The sellers probably do not want to invest the money to replace the windows as there are many reasons for a sale to fall apart before closing and that would be a big expense on an unsold house. You are not entitled to buy the house on your terms, regardless of the time or effort you have put into the deal.

All I can tell you is that there are many costs of raising children and there are lots of tradeoffs. For example, if you pay more for the house but are able to save money with carpools and swapping supervision duties or shared recreational activities, it might still be a good deal. A happy and stable living situation in a good neighborhood may not be something you can value with any financial calculator.

Good luck in your house hunting kcjjmama. Hopefully you'll find the perfect home for you and your children

Thanks for the help here. The deal started by my friend (their neighbor) telling me to look at the house. They never put it on the market, but I asked to have my realtor involved and then they said that they would also need to involve their realtor. Our realtors agreed to split 5% instead of the typical 6% since they wouldn’t have marketing costs. I offered the price they asked for plus the 5% realtors fees on top. Their realtor thinks they would list the house $18K higher than our agreed upon price, but the seller has told me he thinks her price is too high. My search area is very small and there is not much on the market in the area. I wouldn’t say it’s strongly in favor of the buyer or seller—but there aren’t a lot of options for what I am looking for...4-5 bedrooms, 2500-3000 sf, within 5-10 minutes of everything we do, and no major reno to do.

As much as I like this house, I feel like what I offered originally was close to the top of what it was worth. Adding new windows to the cost of the house would take the price up to a point that I don’t think makes sense for the area. It would be the most expensive house in the neighborhood by far. There aren’t a lot of comps for this house because of its age and the fact that it’s on three lots, but I think paying for the windows myself puts me in a bad position should I need to sell.

I have asked for nothing else from the inspection report to be done and so far have offered their asking price and added on realtors fees as each realtor became involved. They haven’t given up anything. I think that they could at least come back and negotiate. They told their realtor they were also concerned because my house was not yet on the market, but they’ve known all along we have been waiting on them (2 weeks to accept an offer, 1 week to allow us to schedule inspection, 2 months total of this process during which they went ahead and got a bridge loan and bought a house almost twice as expensive as their current one. They close on it in two weeks.)

We have told them that I would list my house as soon as we were done with the offer period. I also have a potential buyer already who plans to make an offer on my house anyday, but has been waiting to know what I decide about the other house. I think it’s very possible that I can sell my house before it is listed.

The whole thing has been exhausting and very drawn out. Their realtor is difficult to work with (maybe mine is too, I don’t know—she’s good to me). And I may soon have an offer on my own house and nowhere to go. I keep watching listings to see if anything else pops up, and so far, there’s nothing.

If I read it correctly - the sellers have already bought a house but haven't got a buyer (except you) for their (this) house. They will list it, as is, for somewhere up to $18,000 over the price you negotiated. Maybe it's a waiting game. It sounds like a gamble for the sellers unless they've got someone else who's interested. It does sound mentally exhausting.

Yes, gargamel. And and I offered an additional $8000 (half the window quote asking that they cover the other half), so they will list it for only $10K over that price and have to pay 6% realtor fees and probably will still come back to the window problem.

I am also annoyed because he told his realtor that he showed me that the windows were rotten and that I was ok with that. He mentioned that they would probably need to look into windows if they chose to stay in the home but never showed me rotten windows. And they didn’t say anything about rotten windows on their disclosures.

Well it could still be yours in the end...maybe they will find out no one else is interested when it's listed, and will have to come down in their price. It sounds like they think they hold all the cards because they know you're interested. But if it is really priced to sell, then I guess it will.

Did your window quote include the installation? There might be additional costs there because who knows if there's other damage. It does sort of make you wonder what else is in that house that they didn't mention (but maybe they didn't have to mention the windows because it's an obvious "defect"). Did your inspector say anything about the electrical?

To bad you had realtors involved, that would of paid a good part of the Windows.

Electrical all looked good. They had a very good electrician update everything and that is in good shape, but it does make me wonder what else they left out in the disclosures.

Local laws and practices vary but in my area, the sellers would not have mentioned the windows in disclosures either. The condition of items which are open and obvious does not need to be disclosed. Disclosures and inspections cover issues which are not obvious like water issues, lead or radon test results, plumbing issues which are behind walls, under floors, etc.

I would gather some additional info about the house. Ask your realtor for an estimate of the share of comparable houses which are financed with an FHA loan, as the current condition of those windows will disqualify FHA buyers. How many other issues were raised with the inspection report and how expensive would it be to fix all of them? The sellers may be deluding themselves if they think other buyers won't object to the windows.

Selling an occupied house is always a hassle so I would give a couple thousand dollars to avoid the pain. Plus, selling sooner means fewer utilities and taxes to pay although you are giving up the possibility of an increase in value. I have bought and sold several houses and found whenever I have felt pressure to pull the trigger, I start questioning myself. It is easy to stress about details and forget my goal is not to buy a house, but to have a solid and stable living situation for my family or a good investment in the long run.

Dont underestimate the value of the location, the neighborhood, the access to your job and the places you visit regularly. Much of living your life takes place outside the walls of the structure.