Ar_home_b_search
 

Large investment pools of money and subsidized first time homebuyers are duking it out forcing up prices over market...

 

I had another meeting with CCCSD over the backyard sewer mains in the Las Lomitas subdivision in Danville CA. This affects 50 homes. I was informed that in response to my efforts the district is contemplating a proposal for a special assessment that would put the sewer main where it belongs..at the street! This was estimated at cost of about 1.1 M $

I believe the cost per owner is negligable compared to the enhancement in value and utility in return. These lots are almost all .25 acres and moving the sewer would enable owners to improve these homes and make them more competitive with surrounding neighborhoods.

 

 

 

According to latest on discussed Danville,CA prescriptive easement of backyard sewer main, my source at Landamerica Commonwealth informs me the CCCSD resolution amendment indeed shows in the public record on each of the listed parcel #'s. I have not personally confirmed this but if true my thank you to the responsible parties at CCCSD.

I don't really know if my letter to First American precipitated this chain of events. I do know that the positive results were achieved without lawyers or acrimony. CCCSD acted as a responsible party within the constraints of the situation.

Prescriptive easements are grey area in real estate. No public record usually exists of these easements, even when it's a sewer main in the backyard when most sewer mains are at the street. This amendment in the public record should now inform potential buyers of this very real compromise of property value and utility.

 

Gary Ginsberg
Realtor
Danville,CA

gary@garyginsberg.com

888 893 8595

 

I looked at the web discussions about recourse and non-recourse loans and then opened the textbook. Purchase money loans are non-recourse..even if junior lien. Subsequent loans and refis not protected by anti-deficiency measures.

The big gap in textbook and discussion on web.. 80/20 purchase money scenario that used a credit card type HELOC as the second purchase money loan. Is the HELOC recourse in this situation if the 1st position lender forecloses non-judicially?

My query regaards CA only.

 

 

Useful rule of thumb..average cost to foreclose 55 to 70 K

Short sale offers of less than average loss more likely accepted.

Offers should stress buyer's committment and patience with short sale process. This may prevail over a higher offer with less committment.

Buyers be advised that banks will likely retain right to have seller accept other offers (offer, not back-up) even after a short sale offer accepted. Bank name isn't on the sales contract.

For those selling short: 

A waiver of a security mutually agreed to between the lender and borrower (short seller) to avoid foreclosure may result in a secured debt becoming recourse debt (unsecured).

Original purchase money loans, including junior liens ,are protected from deficiency judgements in a non-judicial foreclosure situation by anti-deficiency laws.  Borrowers lose that protection for subsequent loans on the property like second mortgages and refis of the original loan. 

Consult expert advice if your a short seller to understand possibilities of future attachment of personal assets and taxation issues.

Buyers,this is a great time in California to buy a short sale property if you plan on living in the residence at least 5 years. Take advantage of historically still low interest rates, possibly far more important than a few thousand dollars in lower price if loan held to term.

 

Gary Ginsberg

Realtor
888 893 8595

 

 

I have been dealing with a situation that concerns me as a homeowner and Realtor...
The problem: A sewer main in an unconventional location running through the middle of my backyard as well as 50 neighbors.
The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District holds a "prescriptive" easement to maintain the system.
This easement was not revealed on the preliminary title report or TDS at time of sale. In other words undisclosed by owner , realtor, and title co.

The title co maintains that the easement essentially doesn't exist because it is not indexed by the usual grantor/grantee method and easement declaration is not constructive notice.

I am empathetic of both parties positions but would like to point out that leaves potential homeowners in a quandary...who is responsible for disclosing the long term existence of a sewer main in an unconventional location?

I contacted California Asso. of Realtors and the opinion was that the realtor is not held responsible for investigating prescriptive easements not visible to the eye unless a representation is made by the Realtor he will investigate prescriptive easements or if a client has expressed concern about prescriptive easements.

Let's assume the owner didn't know.

The title co is not required to report prescriptive easements not recorded against the individual parcels.

Is it possible for a potential homeowner to buy in Danville unaware of a decades old sewer main in a backyard and title insurance not applicable , CCCSD not liable, and realtor and owner not culpable....???????????????

 

 

Danville, CA 94526

 

Issue: Sewer Main

A sewer easement declaration from 1977 against all lots in Los Lomitas subdivision #1 is unreported by First American in a purchase dating Dec 31, 1991. The  sewer easement is not placed where permitted by subdivision CC&R 's at perimeter of property, restricts possible present and future utility and desirability of subject property, resulting in a loss. Present owner will be obligated to disclose this fact upon sale. Restrictions placed on building additions, in ground pool, or additional garage space affect market value for present and future owners.  

 

Time line

 

1991 TDS was filled out by seller and no disclosure was made of sewer main or easement for sewer main through middle of backyard. See exhibit 1.

 

1991 Preliminary title report issued by First American disclosed public utility easement is at rear and side 2 feet of premises per CC&R's of 1948.  Purchase of property finalized 12/31/91. See exhibit 2, 3, 4.

 

Circa 2000 Plumber puts ear to ground while cleaning lateral and shows owner that sewer lateral from house runs towards backyard. Owners did not understand at that time the lateral was coupled to a sewer pipe maintained by Central Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) until....

 

10/14/2005 CCCSD sent letters about impending sewer line work affecting property and requested a meeting. At subsequent meeting representative of CCCSD asked where the sewer lateral was and when shown where plumber( as cited above) identified lateral,  they paced off approximately 15 yards east and pointed to the ground and said the issue was actually inability to get a camera past said point.  Representative said it was probably due to a lateral connection, and if necessary CCCSD would need to dig a hole to finish assessment. Representative said owner would be responsible for lateral coupling to sewer main if responsible for blockage. Suggested owner get bid from independent contractor and compare to the bid CCCSD's contractor would offer to correct the connection if owner doesn't perform the work. No offer or representation that CCCSD would pay for the correction was made.

 Notification letter of 10/14/2005 established first official notification to owner of the existence of sewer main and responsible agency i.e.: CCCSD See exhibit 5

 

3/30/2006

  An independent contractor was contacted; videoed lateral and investigated & discovered the 2nd lateral, which was speculated by CCCSD upon their visit as mentioned above.  When 2nd lateral was exposed, it was found to be constituted of Orangeburg (tar paper) pipe. This pipe was assumed to date from conversion of a breezeway to a bedroom with bathroom long before current owner. Contractor assessed it as decades old. This bathroom was connected not to pre-existing plumbing but via second lateral to the sewer main in unconventional fashion and protruded slightly into sewer main.   Owner's contractor offers to replace both laterals for total of $4100. A decision was made to proceed since CCCSD had represented the issue as a problem that was responsibility of owner. There was no contact from CCCSD and scope of work to be performed as well as fee was unknown. Required cement work to repair trenching incurred during lateral replacements added to the contractor's initial bid increasing the cost.  See exhibit #6

 

July 14, 2006, letter from CCCSD informed owners that a contractor was retained by CCCSD and would contact owner. Owner contacted CCCSD on receipt of letter to inform them that work was done.  Several weeks later, contractor arrived at subject property and was visibly angry when informed work was already performed. The contractor tells owner that CCCSD was going to pay for all work at no charge to owner.  Owner contacted CCCSD again by phone immediately and informed representative that work was already done. She inquired whether work permit was issued by CCCSD - an affirmative was given. Owner made verbal request at that time to see if there would be remuneration as contractor stated that CCCSD would incur all costs, but that was declined.  In fact, there was no work done by CCCSD on this property at any time.

 

9/07 Owners decide to market the home and preliminary title report upon review shows no sewer easement other than original CC&R limitations. Owner at that point inquired of current title company on accuracy of title report leading to question of report of easement on original title report from First American Title in 1991.  Owners decided to ask neighbors about the sewer main. Upon inquiry, one neighbor informs owner the sewer easement was recorded against all the lots of the subdivision in the 70's and not recorded against each individual lot. See exhibit 7, 8.

 

11/07 First American was contacted with a claim by owner of subject property. This is because owner has demonstrable loss from sewer easement that is well known from 1955 and certainly from 1977 on.

The loss incurred is due to a building restriction of 7.5' on either side of the sewer main per CCCSD. This severely limits any expansion of the home through additions on the north side, precludes an in-ground pool, or additional garage space to enhance the present 1 car garage. The desirability of the home is diminished because the great majority of homes in the area have sewers at the street, not in the backyard, and present owner is obligated to disclose this material fact. See exhibit 9, 10, 11.

 

The 1977 easement declaration, if known by owners before approach by CCCSD to initiate work on lateral connection, may have resulted in a different outcome of owner bearing expense of replacement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summation:

 

  • CCCSD requires 15 feet of clearance for easement of total running length of sewer main through unrestricted portions of back yard
  • Enhancement of said property such as expansion of one-car garage, addition of in-ground pool or building addition is severely diminished and comparable homes in the area are undergoing expansion without like restrictions
  • That the sewer main was undisclosed at time of purchase by owner and title company
  • The sewer main is not located per requirements  of  CC&R's
  • That sewer pipe restricts desirable property enhancements

  

These are recently discovered facts from investigation begun after receipt of preliminary report from Land America Commonwealth dated 9/07.  See exhibit #8.

Note: Amended preliminary title # 2 includes copies of ALTA/CLTA title policies.

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

 
 

Gary Ginsberg

Danville, CA

More about me…

Area Pro Realty NorCal

Cell Phone: (925) 366-4550

Email Me

Gary Ginsberg's Danville Real Estate Blog


Links

Archives

RSS 2.0 Feed for this blog