Q. My siblings and I recently sold our late parents’ small home in a sought-after urban neighborhood where we all grew up. We accepted the highest of several offers (well above asking price) from buyers we assumed would renovate the house. To our dismay, it is being replaced by a huge new home that’s out of character with the block. Our former neighbors are upset with us, too. Didn’t the buyers or their agent have a legal or moral obligation to tell us of their tear-down intent? How could we have prevented this?
A. I don’t think the buyers or their agent had any obligation, legal or ethical, to disclose their plans to you voluntarily. If anything, the burden was on you and your listing agent to ask them or otherwise try to ascertain the intentions of the various people seeking to buy the home—a difficult task at best. But even if bidders had verbally agreed to keep the house intact, the promise wouldn’t have been binding on them; they could always say they changed their mind after learning the renovation costs.
Perhaps your agent didn’t educate you on the economic reality in your local housing market: Your parents’ property was worth more as a buildable lot than as a small, outdated residence, and the highest bids were likely to come from tear-down buyers rather than remodelers. For your part, you might reasonably have been suspicious of an offer so much higher than the others. But you were apparently pleased to sell the house for a very attractive price.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
Yes, you could have blocked this outcome, but only by putting into the contract a stipulation (or a covenant or deed restriction) that the house couldn’t be torn down or the façade significantly altered for a certain number of years. But be assured, that would have scared off not only the tear-down buyers but also the renovators who would not want the potential hassles of such a restriction. And you would certainly have received a much lower price for your parents’ home.
Have a money-and-ethics question you’d like answered in this column? Write to editor in chief Knight Kiplinger at ethics@kiplinger.com.
-
Six Ways Trump Could Change Your RetirementFrom Social Security to Medicare and beyond, Trump could change your retirement in ways you may not expect.
-
The Three Financial Questions Every Retiree Asks (or Should)Unless you can answer these three important questions, you may be at risk for the biggest retirement worry there is: Running out of money.
-
Should All Student Debt Be Forgiven?student loans My favorite reform would be making the repayment of all student loans proportional to the borrower’s future earnings.
-
Should Lenders Mail Unsolicited Checks to Potential Borrowers?credit & debt When it comes to preying on weak credit risks, it looks like Wall Street is at it again.
-
Do Adult Children Have an Obligation to Support Needy Parents?savings Even if some siblings can afford to help more than others, no one should shirk the obligation to assist in some way -- financial or otherwise.
-
How Can the Approval Process for New Drugs Be Speeded Up?investing There are many reform proposals, including some from free-market think tanks.
-
Should Ethics Determine Who You Do Business With?Smart Buying Consumers seeking to do business only with ethical companies should ask these questions.
-
Should Colleges Use Collection Agencies for Overdue Student Bills?college Colleges have many potent options for getting students to square their accounts.
-
Hold Soda Makers to Account for Health Woes?Business Costs & Regulation A strong case can be made that it’s unethical for companies to target the very customers who shouldn’t be heavy consumers of a given product.
-
Ways to Protect Borrowers From Predatory Home Lendingreal estate Land contracts drain low-income communities of resources.
