Any buyer who goes to an open house can see a big binder on a table somewhere, containing the property disclosures. When the buyer gets half-way serious about the house, their agent then requests a copy of the “packet” from the seller’s agent. Some packets are better than others. Here’s how.

A good packet will contain a current pest control inspection from a locally known and reputable company. Next will be a general home inspection report, written in narrative form, also from a locally known and reputable inspector. If the general inspection revealed specific and serious defects, i.e. a suspect foundation or an exceedingly old furnace, these findings would be followed through with specialty inspections, i.e. engineering or heating contractor. Next up would be a video inspection report of the sewer lateral. Lastly, you would find disclosure forms completed by the seller with their specific declaration of defects, malfunctions, hazardous materials, work done with/without permits, natural hazards, earthquake retrofitting and lead based paint.

A “not-so-good” packet can come in two forms. The first would be a very “skinny” packet, perhaps with just a pest report from an unknown, out of area inspector. Or the seller just replies “don’t know” to just about every question.

The second is the exceedingly “fat” packet. A fat packet might have all the good stuff included but it is buried amongst a ream of only marginally relevant, and often, very old information. The seller’s agent might even include all the disclosures from the previous sale, even after a house has been completely renovated. Some of these fat packets have been 150 pages, or more!

Whenever you see a fat packet, you can be sure that at some point in the past, the listing agency (not necessarily the agent him/herself) has been sued for failing to disclose something. The fat packet is strictly a lawyerly response to the question “what is important to disclose?” Answer: “Don’t try to figure this out. Give them everything!”

Now, I’m certainly not advocating that a seller shouldn’t disclose something from a previous sale, or distant history. But the listing agent should take the time to cull the packet for the most relevant and timely info and place this first. The rest of the stuff can be given to the buyers after their offer is accepted, assuming the buyer has an inspection contingency.

Needless to say, unnecessarily fat packets are a pet peeve of mine. On my listings, I spend a lot of time thinking through what does, and doesn’t belong, in the packet. I make sure the info is presented in a logical sequence, and that most, if not all questions about the condition of the property are easily answered. This way, the buyer can feel comfortable making their offer “as-is” subject to their own inspections. If I’ve done my job right, then the buyer’s inspectors won’t come up with anything that I didn’t already cover in my packet.

Brett Weinstein