snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Legal Affairs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05 June 2007, 06:17 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,626
Vanishing Haunted residence grounds for breaking lease?

Comment: Is it true that a renter in California can legally break his or
her lease if he or she discovers that the residence is haunted, and the
haunting was not disclosed by the landlord before the lease was signed?

I live in California, but the only evidence I can find for this is
anecdotal, at best. (Not asking for myself, happily!)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05 June 2007, 08:39 PM
ericsmom
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Not all states, but the term for it is "stigmatized property"

"by loose definition, is the site or suspected site of a murder or suicide, criminal activity or even a resident poltergeist. About 30 states have specific laws on the books saying that agents and sellers cannot be held liable for not disclosing such nonmaterial, or nonphysical, "defects" about a house. Agents do have an obligation to disclose any "latent defects" to the buyer if they may materially affect the physical health or safety of individuals on the premises, but rarely would a suicide or murder on the premises meet that standard. "
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05 June 2007, 09:08 PM
Malalaise
 
Posts: n/a
Default

So the question now is how naughty must a ghost be to allow you to break your lease?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05 June 2007, 09:14 PM
Artemis's Avatar
Artemis Artemis is offline
 
Join Date: 08 October 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 6,891
Default

Wasn't that basically why the Amityville Horror family faked the ghosts/poltergeists in their house?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05 June 2007, 09:47 PM
ericsmom
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
Wasn't that basically why the Amityville Horror family faked the ghosts/poltergeists in their house?
I'm not sure why the Lutz's faked it, but it could have something to do with the excuses Ron DeFeo had for murdering his family in the house.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06 June 2007, 04:17 AM
Blackhawk
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Does finding a large bloodstain count as an exception to "nonmaterial"? A friend bought a house in Georgia that had one piece of furniture left in the house- a bed. When they removed said bed there was a large bloodstain underneath on the wood flooring. It seems the previous owner had commited suicide by shooting himself in bed and the stain was never able to be removed. The agent never disclosed this to the family until they asked about it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06 June 2007, 05:01 AM
Rehcsif
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawk View Post
Does finding a large bloodstain count as an exception to "nonmaterial"? A friend bought a house in Georgia that had one piece of furniture left in the house- a bed. When they removed said bed there was a large bloodstain underneath on the wood flooring. It seems the previous owner had commited suicide by shooting himself in bed and the stain was never able to be removed. The agent never disclosed this to the family until they asked about it.
I would say yes, it's material, and would be grounds for compensation of some sort if they tried to cover it up. But it has little to do with the fact that it's blood/suicide... the same would be true if there was a huge water stain there that they tried to cover up with the bed.

-Tim
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07 June 2007, 08:17 PM
Grendel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rehcsif View Post
I would say yes, it's material, and would be grounds for compensation of some sort if they tried to cover it up. But it has little to do with the fact that it's blood/suicide... the same would be true if there was a huge water stain there that they tried to cover up with the bed.

-Tim
Actually, a water stain would probably be worse, as it might indicate undisclosed plumbing or water ingress problems.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07 June 2007, 08:50 PM
RBCal RBCal is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 April 2005
Location: Palm Springs, CA
Posts: 1,743
Default

In California on the mandated legal disclosure forms you have to state whether someone has died in the house within the last two years. When I bought my house they answered yes to this question.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10 June 2007, 06:30 AM
RivkahChaya's Avatar
RivkahChaya RivkahChaya is offline
 
Join Date: 14 July 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,275
Default

When I was looking at houses a few years ago, there was one that was priced about $15,000 below what was to be expected for the area and age & size of the house. Turned out it had been on the market for a couple of years with no buyers, because the previous owner had comitted suicide in the house.

Since I don't freak out easily, I seriously considered buying it, but at the last minute, something a little smaller, lower priced, and needing a lot less work came on the market, so I bought that instead.

I've gotten married and had a baby since then, and now the current house seems awfully small, and I often wish I'd bought the "suicide" house instead.

So sometimes other people's superstitions can be good for those who don't share them.

If I hadn't asked about the low price, wondering what roofing or plumbing defect was being concealed, I don't know whether the realtor would have told me about the suicide or not.

As far as the Lutzes-- the impression I've gotten from what I've read was not that they even faked the haunting, but that they simply made up a story out of whole cloth after moving out, because they needed to make some money fast.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.