Sunday, July 07, 2013

Should property buyers be told?

I had a call from someone looking at buying a lot and building an upscale home in Sugarbush (Oro-Medonte) and wondered if having a  village site or an ossuary in the neighbourhood would have an impact on their property value. The developer did not disclose the existence of the archaeological sites to the buyer prior the offer being made on the property. Should he have?   

An ossuary was found in the subdivision in December 2011 but is not marked as  an archaeological site or a First Nations burial site.

2 comments:

John Raynor said...

I received an email from the concerned parties this morning and upon further review of their documents it would appear that there was a disclosure re the archaeology found in the area. "It was very interesting & informative to speak to you the other day. Both .... and I checked our purchase agreement closely and there was in fact a disclosure pertaining to the possibility of first nations sites and artifacts being located in the area, so thankfully ther was no issue with that disclosure. I was in contact with a Ministry of Culture archeologist, Jim Sherrat (sp) who was very helpful and after checking advised that our lot seemingly was not affected. As I mentioned I took some pics of the Diamond Valley Ossuary last week and I'm sure that you'll agree that it looks far different from when you last saw it." So the system does seem to work and the developer showed due diligence and yes the ossuary looks far better tham it did in the spring of 2012-----as to property values nearby, that remains subjective.

Jason Simpson said...

Super post, Most of us take pleasure in any individual and her or his fantastic post. Your own post is reasonably beneficial in my opinion. I want to view the subsequent post. Kind regards about producing.
Due diligence US property