Buyer Betty Says Seller Should of Warned The Public About Her Damn Cats!

Should the seller also have to disclose that they have peanuts in the home?  Sorry, but I put this back in the buyer's (and their agent's) lap.  If you KNOW you have a severe allergy and KNOW it's reasonable to expect things that you're allergic to might be present in a home you want to visit, then you need to inquire in advance.  I've had clients with allergies, and I've asked in advance.  No big deal.

But this is just an engineer's logic and has zero do do with how the legal system would probably interpret.  Bill

Greg,  This is not a legal opinion because I am not an attorney. I live in California where people can, and do, sue for anything, including how the wind blows.

I do feel there is a duty to disclose cats and other animals in the house and/or that reside on the property.  For safety reasons, as well as possible health issues as you illustrated in your post.

Agents have a duty to be honest, deal fair, act in good faith, disclose all known facts known to the agent materially affecting the value or desirability of the property, and exercise diligence and reasonable skill in performance of their duties. There is a standard of utmost care which I feel was not demonstrated by not disclosing in the MLS the property is the home to several cats that reside inside the house.

If we're going to take the stance that you have to disclose, where do you draw the line?  Every pet including Goldie the Goldfish?  And why stop at pets?  What else might someone be allergic to?  How about that poison ivy next to the woods? 

In my opinion....

If I were that allergic to something,  then I would damn well be ASKING prior to scheduling a showing if there were any of that something in the home.  I believe it's the buyer's own issue and the seller is not legally responsible, in this case.

That said....sellers shouldn't be required to disclose if they have a pet.  But, numerous pets would be nice to know about.

Gee, this is a tough one! Yes I think a seller should disclose if they have pets in the house because of this reason.  I am allergic but not to the extent that buyer was.  I am fatally allergic to bee and wasp stings.  Do I think they need to disclose whether or not there are hives in the yard? NO! But if they are in the house YES.

I had a girlfriend that was highly allergic to cats.  If it was the first time we were visiting somebody elses house, we always had to inquire about "cats" first.  She was like the Buyer, and would immediately become inflamed.  Experience that once, and you'll never want to experience it again.

We were shopping for houses, and always asked about Cats.  A cat didn't even have to be living in the house anymore.  Once we went into a vacant house, that only had one cat living in it before it was vacated, and she went down hard.  We didn't have the Inhaler with us, and I thought she was going to die - it was really scarey.

With the Buyer being that sensitive to Cats, it's her fault for not inquiring first.  She should know better.

I put the responsibilty back on the buyer's agent and the buyer.  If you have a severe allergy you should ask all of the right questions BEFORE you show the house.  Of course if she wants to sue no one can stop her but whether a court will hear the case is another story.

I totally agree with others, this is the buyer and buyers agent responsibility, not the sellers.

I am not a big pet person but this is on the buyer and her agent more than the seller. If the buyer had issues they should have been brought to the agent's attention and a quick inquiry made before they open the door.

I'm in line with Liz and Bill Spear - where do you draw the line?  I know that's not how the legal system works, but I'd find it hard to penalize a seller for this.  I think it should be mentioned in showing instructions.  Some folks are very allergic to flowers - should that cause a disclosure?

Greg, I'm not an attorney; however, it's always better to disclose. I checked the Texas Seller's Disclosure and they ask if the owner is occupying the property but it doesn't say anything about pets occupying the property. However, on the listing agreement, page 4 of 10 under Liability and Indemnification, line 2 reads, "Seller assumes all risk of any loss, damage or injury." For that reason, if I was the listing agent, I would disclose there are cats on the property in MLS and through Showing Services.

The buyer has no case.  The presence of cats is not a material fact, at least not in North Carolina, so the seller is not under obligation to disclose.  I agree with others who have said it was the buyer's responsibility to ask about cats beforehand.  Her agent should have called or emailed all the listing agents when making appointments:  "My client is highly allergic to cats.  Please confirm with your seller that no cats are currently living in the home, nor have there been cats visiting or staying in the home for at least six months."

Some people are allergic to cigarette smoke, yet I've nevr seen any agent disclose " sellers smoke in house". Buyers health is her responsibilty, not that of every seller who has their house on the market that she decides she wants to see.

I would think that the buyer knew she had a severe allergy to cats. So she should have notified her Realtor® of such allergies. That way her Realtor could ask for her in advance.

It is ridiculous to disclose pets living in the house.  Buyer Beware!  I once worked with a buyer who was allergic to cats and she could tell the second the front door was opened. If she sensed cats, that house was crossed off the list.

(and while we're at it, it is also ridiculous for agents to post remarks in MLS such as "Don't let the cat out." It is dangerous to try to grab a fleeing cat!)

The listing agent should have mentioned CATS in the showing remarks on the MLS, and since the client has severe allergies her agent should have called to make sure no cats were in the house since such a buyer would have absolutely no interest in residing in a property permeated with cat dander.  My son is allergic and I didn't bother looking at houses where cats were in residence.

A little more due diligence on the behalf of each agent was in order--yep, I fault the agents.

The standard contract in Arizona makes it very clear that it's always ultimately the Buyer's responsibility to do their "due diligence" before pulling the trigger.