Is septic inspection really necessary?
Some buyers say 'water test' is enough to assess condition
By Barry Stone
Inman News®
DEAR BARRY: When we bought our home, we did not have the septic system professionally inspected. Instead, we ran water at the sinks, bathtub and shower for more than an hour. There were no backups, so we thought everything was OK because our water test exceeded normal use. Recently, the system was serviced, and we learned that the septic tank is substandard and will soon collapse if not replaced. Are the sellers and real estate agent liable for their failure to disclose this condition? --Ryan
DEAR RYAN: The sellers and agent were required to disclose the problem only if they knew about it. It is highly unlikely that the agent knew the condition of a buried tank. The sellers, on the other hand, may or may not have known, depending on whether there was a septic inspection during the time they owned the property.
But regardless of who knew, your agent and the sellers' agent should have recommended that the septic system be inspected. That would have been normal procedure in the course of the transaction. There was simply no excuse for letting that go by. If you were advised to have a septic inspection but declined to have one, that was a decisive mistake.
It was also a mistake to think that a water test would provide an adequate evaluation of the system. There are many kinds of septic problems that are undetectable by merely running water down the drains. A proper septic inspection involves opening the tank and draining the contents to expose the condition of the interior. The fact that sinks and showers were draining had no bearing on the condition of the tank. A septic tank can be collapsing and still allow water to drain. Someone should have advised you accordingly.