Dear Editor,
Re: “Real Estate 2.0,” July 7.
I read with interest the article regarding Suuty.com. I have long wondered why realtors feel they are entitled to such a large portion of anyone’s biggest private investment – their home.
With respect to comments in the article pertaining to the “value of a licensed professional realtor,” I am confused. Years ago, my husband and I purchased our first home in Richmond. We were given the listing by the selling realtor, stating that the house was insulated.
When we renovated and opened up some outside walls, we found this was not the case. The issue ended in court and we lost the case, even though we had it “in writing.” The realtor assumed no responsibility, because we did not personally question whether the house was indeed insulated... so much for “errors and omissions insurance and adhering to a code of ethics.”
Then, about 10 years ago, a friend purchased a house in Richmond, again through a realtor, which was “inspected” and fees were paid to both “professionals” (realtor and house inspector).
When my friend moved in, she realized she had rats in the attic. The inspector admitted to seeing rat feces in the attic, but did not report this to her, as “that was not what he was inspecting for.”
Neither the realtor nor the inspector were found legally responsible. Very ethical, I’d say. Where was the errors and omissions insurance on this one?
Kudos to Marilouise Muller and best wishes for a successful with her online “Uber of real estate.”
Pat Hugh
Richmond
