Pasadena: COO Waiver

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Anybody familiar with the "Certificate of Occupancy Transfer Waiver" that allows the purchase of a SFR that fails to pass the mandatory city COO Inspection that is conducted commensurate with each pending transfer?

The waiver is described on MLS and noted briefly in the P.A.

Per the City the waiver allows a transfer/purchase to be recorded with the buyer responsible to satisfy the conditions of the inspection after the purchase.

I'm thinking that the appraisal must be conducted "subject to" granting of the COO but that contradicts the nature of the waiver.

I'm waiting on the MB client to contact underwriting. Thanks as always.

 

[panappr]

Anybody familiar with the "Certificate of Occupancy Transfer Waiver" that allows the purchase of a SFR that fails to pass the mandatory city COO Inspection that is conducted commensurate with each pending transfer?

The waiver is described on MLS and noted briefly in the P.A.

Per the City the waiver allows a transfer/purchase to be recorded with the buyer responsible to satisfy the conditions of the inspection after the purchase.

I'm thinking that the appraisal must be conducted "subject to" granting of the COO but that contradicts the nature of the waiver.

I'm waiting on the MB client to contact underwriting. Thanks as always.

ZZ

I herd that this also going to be a big concern for all LA City transfers. For all the single family residences that were altered into duplexes or garage conversions that will have to be put back to their original use. All transfers will have to have a compliance certificate?? This will be a huge undertaking for building and safety, especially in the San Fernando Valley. I haven't seen anything in MLS that addresses this yet. Still brokers are posting buyer to verify all permits. But I think this part will have to change. All appraisals should be "subject to" property infractions that may cause the buyer to comply after transfer. I've seen appraisals where they have noted alterations and have either done an as-is "cost to cure" or stated that it poses no health or safety issues.

 

[CURT VAN HOOSER]

Sorry! I've never heard of it. Any idea what the cost to cure is?

 

[panappr]

Sorry! I've never heard of it. Any idea what the cost to cure is?

Well I guess that would vary on each assignment, but I still don't think its right, if the borrower has the liability of having to cure. I also asked building & safety about grandfathering, and he laughed and said "whos grandfather was it, we here allot of that around here ".

 

[CURT VAN HOOSER]

Pan...I was replying to ZZ. Anything having to do with this waiver and its conditions need to be fully disclosed.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

CVH:

--24 pt font BF disclosure including copy/paste of the general plan reference source.

--Per the City the COO inspection hasn't been ordered yet, and there is no way to know what, if anything, will conditioned by the city.

HOWEVER, I'm not inclined to opine an "as is" C2C because the "cost" of failing to obtain the COO could be the difference between market value...and zero if the property is deemed uninhabitable because the COO conditions are unfulfilled.

Maybe I'm being too conversative and my stance will run off another client?????

 

[CURT VAN HOOSER]

As I have stated before, it's a matter of personal grooming. What ever makes those little hairs on the back of your neck lay back down is surely the preferred course of action.

What was the original SOW and are you in the process of modifying and clarifying?

My apologies...I really can't think straight right now as I have to clear by desk and pack my gear for my vacation. Leaving for Bodega Bay tomorrow morning... Please let us know how this turns out.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Anybody familiar with the "Certificate of Occupancy Transfer Waiver" that allows the purchase of a SFR that fails to pass the mandatory city COO Inspection that is conducted commensurate with each pending transfer?

The waiver is described on MLS and noted briefly in the P.A.

Per the City the waiver allows a transfer/purchase to be recorded with the buyer responsible to satisfy the conditions of the inspection after the purchase.

I'm thinking that the appraisal must be conducted "subject to" granting of the COO but that contradicts the nature of the waiver.

I'm waiting on the MB client to contact underwriting. Thanks as always.

Buying or Selling a Home? Get an Inspection!

Whether you're buying or selling a home, make sure it receives a check-up through the city's Occupancy Inspection Program (OIP) before any money changes hands.
To set up an inspection, visit Window #1 at the Pasadena Permit Center, 175 N. Garfield Ave., where you'll fill out an application, pay the fee and make an appointment. On the day of the inspection, a code compliance officer will check the home inside and out, including roofs, chimneys, windows, door frames, electrical, plumbing, heating and ventilation systems, floors and walls. The inspector will point out any potential hazards or health and safety issues, such as rodent infestations.

If a violation is found, the seller is given a reasonable time to make repairs. Common problems include lack of smoke detectors, major work done without permits, water heaters without seismic bracing, leaky plumbing, inadequate parking, and illegal garage conversions.

If you are the buyer, you are not responsible for any repairs unless you have made an agreement with the seller and have signed a waiver promising to make repairs within 30 days of the inspection.

Once repairs are made, the buyer receives a Certificate of Occupancy that is valid until the next time the property is sold. (Apartment complexes with three or more units aren't included in OIP because they're inspected every four years by the city.)

For more information, visit www.cityofpasadena.net/planninganddevelopment (click on Building and Neighborhood Services and look under Code Compliance for Occupancy Inspection Program) or call 744-4633. ​

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Mike, I was waiting for your involvement on my similar thread on the general forum. Do you support the decision to conduct the report "subject to" the COO being obtained, although I know that isn't going to happen if the transfer scenario unfolds as currently planned. I don't want to dodge the issue and I'm fully prepared to defend my stance, but I also want to be user-friendly and not make a bad business decision if an alternative, appropriate response on my part is available.