Selling house with pellet stove

[chrisasst]

We are thinking about moving this summer...My wife is concerned that we would not be able to sell the house with the main heat, and only heat are the two pellet stoves. Has any one sold a house with the only heat source is a pellet stove? I do want to at some point have a forced air furnace installed, but I can imagine that is some big money. I do have an oil tank and oil furnace in the basment, but I took out all the lines upstairs when I remodeled. So that thing is pretty much nonfunctional.

 

[Woody1911a1]

most insurance cos will say no go .

 

[jtakeman]

Yep, Insurance doesn't like solid fuel as primary heat source. You might get lucky if the buyer is able to reconnect the oil furnace. Otherwise you might not get the asking price your looking for.

Edit: was it a boiler or forced air?

 

[Pellet-King]

Never kill the primary heating source!

 

[ironpony]

I would not leave the stoves in the house at all. The buyer might burn it down and a "good" attorney will find a way to hold you liable.

 

[chrisasst]

I would not leave the stoves in the house at all. The buyer might burn it down and a "good" attorney will find a way to hold you liable.

Good point...

Never kill the primary heating source!

Well, it was pretty much killed before I finished it off. My intensions was to put a new system in, and I thought I had years to do it, but..apparently not.

It was a boiler, not forced air.

 

[Woody1911a1]

thing is is that for the buyer to get a mortgage , the bank is going to have the house inspected . that's where you're dead in the water .

if you get that far .

 

[chrisasst]

I agree on all points. Insurance company's do NOT want to hear that the stove is the main source of heat.

Just for my educational purposes, may I ask Why? I did fill out their survey that my insurance sends out each year and stated all I have is a pellet stove(s)...

 

[cds11]

i bought our house three years ago and it did not have a furnace. it used to have an oil furnace in the basement but it was removed after it quit working. i ended up installing an electric furnace with heatpump system. the lender or insurance company had no say in me buying the house. the insurance company hasnt even been here or even done a driveby. so i say if you find the right seller you can sell it either way, with or without the pellet stoves.

 

[chimneylinerjames]

so i say if you find the right buyer you can sell it either way, with or without the pellet stoves

I agree, I am not sure what the insurance companies have to do with this. I can see the bank giving you a hard time.

 

[raybonz]

Good point...



Well, it was pretty much killed before I finished it off. My intensions was to put a new system in, and I thought I had years to do it, but..apparently not.

It was a boiler, not forced air.

If it is just the baseboard that needs to be reinstalled a good plumber can use Pex and get it done..

Ray

 

[P38X2]

I would not leave the stoves in the house at all. The buyer might burn it down and a "good" attorney will find a way to hold you liable.

To go slightly off topic a bit...

How could the previous homeowner be responsible for an accident under the new homeowner, whether it's his or her negligence or not? I understand we live in a litigation obsessed society but that seems way off.

Assuming the mortgage holder was OK with the stove and did their inspection and the prospective buyer also had an inspection done and the sale was made. Now say a cabinet falls off the wall causing injury to the new occupant. Does that mean the previous owner is at fault for a faulty install?.. or the cabinet manufacturer?...or......down the line.

Different scenario....the home is sold with a washer and dryer. Due to lack of proper cleaning by the new owner, the dryer catches fire and destroys the house. How is it the previous owners fault?

Imagine a scenario where the pellet stove causes an incident.

Can someone enlighten me as to how any of the 100's of similar imaginable incidents could possibly legally implicate the previous owner? I mean, unless the house was deliberately booby trapped, this seems insane.

 

[moey]

I be more concerned with the appraiser and the bank then the insurance company.

 

[will711]

I can see the bank giving you a hard time.

I agree it's the bank fronting the $$ they are looking at buyers credit rating then appraised value. I don't think the bank gives a rats A$$ how you heat the house. It's up to the buyer to secure insurance. They are all probably tied together.

Talk to a real estate person they can let you know what will fly and what won't.

 

[chimneylinerjames]

I don't think the bank gives a rats A$$ how you heat the house

I was just thinking if the bank owns the home after it gets foreclosed, they would think this home is easier to sell with a furnace, not just pellets stoves.

 

[movemaine]

As a former Realtor, and my wife currently is, I would say to leave 1 pellet stove and add a Rinnai propane/natural gas heater as the "main" source. That way, you are covered for insurance companies, and a buyer will feel more comfortable if their experience with pellet stoves is minimal.

 

[ironpony]

To go slightly off topic a bit...

How could the previous homeowner be responsible for an accident under the new homeowner, whether it's his or her negligence or not? I understand we live in a litigation obsessed society but that seems way off.

Assuming the mortgage holder was OK with the stove and did their inspection and the prospective buyer also had an inspection done and the sale was made. Now say a cabinet falls off the wall causing injury to the new occupant. Does that mean the previous owner is at fault for a faulty install?.. or the cabinet manufacturer?...or......down the line.

Different scenario....the home is sold with a washer and dryer. Due to lack of proper cleaning by the new owner, the dryer catches fire and destroys the house. How is it the previous owners fault?

Imagine a scenario where the pellet stove causes an incident.

Can someone enlighten me as to how any of the 100's of similar imaginable incidents could possibly legally implicate the previous owner? I mean, unless the house was deliberately booby trapped, this seems insane.

How can McDonalds be liable for the person driving thier car holding coffee spilling it and burning themselves????
How can the railroad be liable for the person walking on the tracks and getting hit??????????
would you like me to continue???????????

 

[will711]

As a former Realtor, and my wife currently is, I would say to leave 1 pellet stove and add a Rinnai propane/natural gas heater as the "main" source. That way, you are covered for insurance companies, and a buyer will feel more comfortable if their experience with pellet stoves is minimal.

I knew sooner or later someone in the profession would have the answers the OP was looking for.

 

[will711]

How can McDonalds be liable for the person driving thier car holding coffee spilling it and burning themselves????
How can the railroad be liable for the person walking on the tracks and getting hit??????????
would you like me to continue???????????

Because the dumb a$$ who boiled his man berries with coffee got a lawyer and it was cheaper in the long run for Mickey Dee's to settle with out admitting any guilt than to have a protracted court battle even if they would have won the legal fees would have been more than the settlement. I know it's not right it's just the way it is . Don't get me started probably one of those topics for the ash can .

 

[johnny1720]

I have a nearly new forced air fuel oil unit in my basement, it works perfectly and I can show you it works. I am 3 hours from you.

 

[P38X2]

Because the dumb a$$ who boiled his man berries with coffee got a lawyer and it was cheaper in the long run for Mickey Dee's to settle with out admitting any guilt than to have a protracted court battle even if they would have won the legal fees would have been more than the settlement. I know it's not right it's just the way it is . Don't get me started probably one of those topics for the ash can .

I suppose it may end there but we're simply discussing the topic at this point.

I still say that unless something about the house was misrepresented by the seller and/or there were malicious omissions from the disclosure statement, the seller cannot be held liable. Of course this is just my opinion but there's a wealth of info to be found easily using yer favorite search engine....ya, bon jour

Seriously, as many crazy lawsuits as there are, if selling a house was this "dangerous", the whole process would be a far bigger nightmare than signing yer name 200 times and incurring decades of fun and easy to make payments.

To the OP- Def a mistep in eliminating part of the existing heating system. I'd simply call a few RE agents and pick their brain regarding your current situation. While you're certainly in the minority, I'm sure there are plenty of homes sold with similar heating setups. Exterior/interior wood/pellet furnaces..etc.

I think at worst, you devalued your property and made the pot of potential buyers very small but I don't think you've created an unsellable property. The property will have its assessed value to the bank, insurance company and town/state. If the value is there in the eyes of a bank, and the buyer is qualified, it'll sell. Insurance companies will insure most anything if you pay the price.

 

[Bioburner]

Just wait till health care gets running full bore. I had to pay a solid fuel surcharge on my insurance that was with a new furnace. Very hard to sell a home in MN without some kind of regular heating.

 

[will711]

I suppose it may end there but we're simply discussing the topic at this point.

I still say that unless something about the house was misrepresented by the seller and/or there were malicious omissions from the disclosure statement, the seller cannot be held liable. Of course this is just my opinion but there's a wealth of info to be found easily using yer favorite search engine....ya, bon jour

Seriously, as many crazy lawsuits as there are, if selling a house was this "dangerous", the whole process would be a far bigger nightmare than signing yer name 200 times and incurring decades of fun and easy to make payments.

To the OP- Def a mistep in eliminating part of the existing heating system. I'd simply call a few RE agents and pick their brain regarding your current situation. While you're certainly in the minority, I'm sure there are plenty of homes sold with similar heating setups. Exterior/interior wood/pellet furnaces..etc.

I think at worst, you devalued your property and made the pot of potential buyers very small but I don't think you've created an unsellable property. The property will have its assessed value to the bank, insurance company and town/state. If the value is there in the eyes of a bank, and the buyer is qualified, it'll sell. Insurance companies will insure most anything if you pay the price.

Wasn't tying this post in with your 1st post only responding to iron pony's ?? Totally agree that if seller gives full disclosure not liable.

 

[DexterDay]

Insurance Co's wil not approve.

My agent "almost" HATES Me. But I have them insalled according to Manf Specs and nothing she can really say?

Although my "Main" source is a working Trane LP Furnace (Not used in years).

When (And if) I move, I am taking my Stoves. I may leave the 30-NC wood stove in the basement. Maybe??

 

[P38X2]

Wasn't tying this post in with your 1st post only responding to iron pony's ?? Totally agree that if seller gives full disclosure not liable.

I know, no prob Just my attempt to divert any potential mod ire away. Ya never know if those 2 words pop up red flags