Resources for Repair,
Restoration and Preservation
Halloween, 2021
Long ago, while in the process of buying my first home, I was excited to discover information that the original section was built around 1690. To me, houses this old have an aura of many past events within its walls. Even if the antecedent events are mundane tasks of daily life, many families of several generations had a connection to their homes, beyond it just being a shelter.
At the closing, after I signed all the papers and received the keys, the seller made an abrupt comment about the ghost that comes with the house. I don't remember reacting to this late disclosure other than stating that if there is any other occupant, they're going to be contributing to the mortgage payments.
I receive what seems like a bucketfull of old-building questions every month. Most are from folks seeking an unbiased opinion about specific issues. Things like slate roof leaks, foundation issues and steam boiler problems, to name a few. I also receive a few questions about interpreting signs that might indicate a building is haunted. (Please don't send me more pictures with floating "ghost orbes" - it's the camera flash or other light reflecting off of dust particles).
Then there's the occasional "Shouldn't the seller have disclosed this house is haunted". Of course that's a question that should be answered by a lawyer that knows the state's disclosure laws. Although I was once asked for litigation support in such a case, I'm only qualified to offer my perspective based on experience living in, working in and inspecting (13,000+) very old buildings. There's been some really strange events and unique occurrances, incuding a couple that freaked me right out. But, nothing occured that I couldn't determine to be the result of nonspiritual forces. I have some fun stories though.
This leads me to 3 different suppositions.
Maybe the ghosts always hide from me.
Maybe my field of reality view is very narrow. Maybe some rare folks' panaramic perception of reality includes much more than is revealed to most.
Maybe ghosts aren't real.
Although I try to examine almost every square foot of a building, the truth is that I'm not looking for ghosts. Just like I'm not looking for the plumber that cut an important beam to install a new pipe. I'm looking for things that had happened or could happen to the old building. The major problems that are discovered are considered material defects. The laws I've read that require sellers' disclosure task the owners with revealing any known material defects to potential buyers.
Maybe ghosts are the people that died trying to fold a fitted sheet.
My state's seller disclosure law defines material defects as "A problem with a residential property or any portion of it that would have a significant adverse impact on the value of the property or that involves an unreasonable risk to people on the property". It's only one sentence so it doesn't reveal specific answers. It only triggers many questions if trying to apply it to paranormal activity.
Are ghosts material?
Can any physical defect or damage to a home even be attributed to a ghost-in-residence like it can for termite and plumber damage?
Did the bleeding walls thing happen before or only after the transfer to a new owner?
On a scale of Casper to Poltergeist, how severe is the haunting?
The impact on the value of the property may be a more tangible application. Some states require disclosure of certain occurances that can stigmatize a property, which likely reduces the value. These events are usually really bad things that recently happened on the premises - the type that are immediately followed with crime scene tape and a chalk outline on the floor. I don't think a haunted reputation is going to be listed as stigmatizing anywhere in the text of these laws.
Maybe the presence of a few apparitions can actually increase the value in some cases. At almost every old hotel, inn, tavern and B&B inspection, someone has a ghost story about the building. Some of these establishments make it well known that there's a supernatural being on-site, to the point that the ghost is the most important member of their marketing team.
Then there's Stambovsky v. Ackley 1991, where there's an actual ruling in a case about a seller that was sued for not disclosing the presence of ghosts. During the seller's ownership of a house in New York, Mrs. Ackley and family had on occassion reported the existence of poltergeists. Her story was published locally and nationally but the buyers claim she didn't share it with them. After signing the contract to purchase the home, the buyers learned of the haunting and refused to proceed to closing, resulting in the forfeit of their deposit. After suing for the return of the deposit (and attempted claim for damages for misrepresentation), the case was dismissed by a trial court. This was appealed and the appellate court reversed the decision. It seems in this case, it doesn't matter if the house is truly haunted or who believed it. The majority judges decided the seller's broadcasting of the hauntings affected the value. I'm sure this case has been cited in other legal actions.
Again, not a lawyer, just an observation from my experiences. It seems that when selling property, disclosing everything that might potentially be an issue to a buyer could minimize problems in the future. It doesn't matter if the issues are physical or psychogenic.
Bill Kibbel, an expert in historic building materials and methods, is a consultant and an inspector of historic homes & commercial buildings at Heritage Building Inspections.
Page was started with Mobirise