Jennifer is selling a townhome built in 1988 that she purchased as a new construction property and has lived in continuously. The buyer's agent claims no SPDS is needed because Jennifer is the original owner. Is this correct?
Correct Answer
B) No, an SPDS is required for all residential resale transactions
An SPDS is required for all residential resale transactions involving properties built after 1960, regardless of whether the seller is the original owner. Being the original owner does not create an exemption from SPDS requirements. The length of occupancy by the original owner is irrelevant to SPDS requirements. There is no simplified SPDS for original owners - the full disclosure is required.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Deep Analysis of This Spds Question
Background Knowledge for Spds
Real World Application in Spds
Common Mistakes to Avoid on Spds Questions
Related Topics & Key Terms
Key Terms:
More Spds Questions
In a licensing seminar in Nogales, a salesperson repeats that Arizona statutes generally require the SPDS itself in every residential resale. Which statement is most accurate under current Arizona rules?
In a Tempe transaction review, a broker says § 32-2156 allows silence about any unpleasant fact that might scare a buyer. What is the most accurate response?
At Sonoran Valley Realty in Tempe, a broker says § 32-2156 allows silence about any unpleasant fact that might scare a buyer. What should the parties assume under current Arizona rules?
Lisa receives an SPDS from the seller on Tuesday and her agent emails her a corrected version on Friday of the same week. According to Arizona law, when does Lisa's right to cancel the purchase contract based on the SPDS expire?
An Arizona seller completes the structural section of the SPDS. Which listed item is the exception that the section does not require the seller to disclose?
- → Lisa is selling her home to her brother Mike for $300,000. Mike is obtaining a conventional loan for the purchase. Their real estate agent says the parties may omit a Seller's Property Disclosure Statement (SPDS) solely because this is a family transaction. Is that advice correct for the residential resale transaction described?
- → Tom is purchasing a home built in 1955 that has been completely renovated. The seller's agent tells him that no SPDS is required because the home was built before a certain date. Is this correct?
- → At a brokerage meeting in Buckeye, a broker says § 32-2156 allows silence about any unpleasant fact that might scare a buyer. What should the parties assume under current Arizona rules?
- → During an Arizona file audit in Pinal County, the buyer says the seller may skip the SPDS because the contract says the property is purchased as is. What is the most accurate response?
- → A salesperson repeats that Arizona statutes generally require the SPDS itself in every residential resale. Which answer best states Arizona law?
- → In a licensing seminar in Phoenix, the buyer says the seller may skip the SPDS because the contract says the property is purchased as is. Which statement is most accurate under current Arizona rules?
- → While reviewing a transaction in Apache County, Under current Arizona rules, which statement best describes 32-2156 boundaries?
- → While reviewing a transaction in Yavapai County, the buyer says the seller may skip the SPDS because the contract says the property is purchased as is. What is the most accurate response?
- → At Sonoran Valley Realty in Flagstaff, a broker says § 32-2156 allows silence about any unpleasant fact that might scare a buyer. What is the best answer under current Arizona law or current Arizona form practice?
- → At Red Rock Desert Properties in Sierra Vista, a salesperson repeats that Arizona statutes generally require the SPDS itself in every residential resale. What is the most accurate response?