By saying the line was to code, he may have been refering to the material it was made out of - some areas put sulphur in the natural gas for safety (makes it smell so you know when you have a gas leak) but the sulfur will react and corrode certains kinds of material and you have to have the right kind of line. He might not have been refering to the instalation of the line itself.

I think you'd have to have some sort of proof that they knew it wasn't installed right to have a solid case.

Shortly after we moved in, we had the old patio torn up to replace it with pavers. The gas line was directly under the cement. The paving company, who said they might have broken the line with their jackhammers, refused to continue work (the entire yard was torn up) until the line was buried the required 18 inches.

If I'm reading right.. you had the old patio torn up but want the old owner to be responsible to pay a $500 charge because you had to move the gas line?

I think if nothing else, it's a good lesson to not just take the word of someone who says the installation was 'to code' because the original owner was somehow in the business, but to check it out for yourself (with an inspector or engineer). I was told by my RE agent that the previous owner was a plumber, and therefore blithely assumed the whole system was good... it turned out he sold valves(!), and the system was anything but good (and it cost me).

If I'm reading right.. you had the old patio torn up but want the old owner to be responsible to pay a $500 charge because you had to move the gas line?

That's correct.

I would say had you not torn up the patio there wouldn't have been an issue. As far as code - it may have been to code when it was installed, but codes change all the time.

I don't think you have anything to stand on with this.

If you do go to small claims court please report the results of the claim. I sincerely doubt you'd win anything, but if you do I'd like to know on what grounds. You'd have to prove they said it was to code (he said, she said), you'd have to prove it wasn't to code when the original patio was poured, you'd need to prove the paving company wasn't negligent and responsible for the damage (regardless of what they said), and that the former owner should be responsible for damage when you chose to put in a new patio. Add to that the fact that the person you purchased the property from did not have the line installed and had only the word of the person they purchased form that it was installed to code, and you knew they didn't install this line and could not be certain it was installed to code (either current code or a former code)..... In other words, the person you purchased from could not have known with certainty the gas line was installed to code as they did not have it installed.

I think you'll have a tough case.

I don't think there's much you can do about it, unfortunately. And if there was, your time and effort and aggravation are more than likely worth more than $500.
It did seem odd to me, however, that he would specifically point out that it was to code twice without prompting. I think that the natural assumption would be that it was to code - pointing it out repeatedly seems a little strange, at least to me.
That being said, I don't think there is much you can do about it. Now, if the inspector was supposed to check it and didn't then that's a different story. (On one house we specifically asked our inspector to check the gas going into a fireplace. Apparently he didn't, because when we went to use the fireplace the first time, it turned out that the gas key thing wasn't even hooked up to a gas line! It cost us almost $600 (it was a really really long line), and the inspector's company paid for it.)

Good point lucy.

Whenever someone stands to gain financially, it is always best to get another opinion on anything that one can't verify otherwise.

If there is a code to comply with..and the issue at hand is presented as being "to code"...the easiest way to make sure is to ask to see the permits and final approval from the regulating authority...or call them on your own, and ask.

In some places, such as NJ, connecting the BBQ to a gas line is against code altogether..buried 18 inches or not...or, at least it was in 1999...I haven't checked to see if that has changed since that time.

This is why IMO it is always best to engage the services of a good RE attorney..as he or she would have advised to ask for the paper work that supported the sellers claim.

That said, if they did disclose what they were led to believe...and if you even believe that they did so without intent to decieve, IMO, chances are that without proof to the contrary, you would have little recourse for reimbursement, if at all.

Last but not least...if you had never changed the patio..and sold later on down the line...chances are you would have passed on the same info to your buyers. Then if they changed the patio, and faced the same issue...would you feel that you owed them the cost of burying the line?

IMO, your answer to that that should be helpful in helping you put this in perspective.

NOT true in NJ, you can connect a gas line to a BBQ, and it has been so for as long as i can remember...And perhaps it was built to code, and the excavation guys "hit" it during the process to dig for the new patio, which would likely need to be deeper for pavers then concrete..

Last but not least...if you had never changed the patio..and sold later on down the line...chances are you would have passed on the same info to your buyers. Then if they changed the patio, and faced the same issue...would you feel that you owed them the cost of burying the line?

IMO, your answer to that that should be helpful in helping you put this in perspective.

Good statement. If we had a rep system, I'd give you some reps lol

Here in NJ, you always hear call before you dig.. you never know what you could hit. It could be an old septic line or it could be a gas line coming in from the street. We didn't put our driveway on the other side of the yard for this very reason, gas lines were on that side although it made perfect sense to have the driveway there as there's a gate on that side. There are other houses that have a driveway over their lines.

What was once to code may not be any more. You buy a used house and have to expect that some thing may not be to current code.

QDognj, I stand corrected; perhaps it is just in our township.

Point is, we had specifically asked for this convenience, and the propane company explained that it could not be done as it was illegal in NJ..as the BBQ is not a stationary object..and therefore could be moved..creating stress on the line...and of course possible leakage.

The site manager for the development checked with the plumbing company that was running the various lines..and they confirmed.

That said...come to think of it, perhaps if the unit is a built in BBQ, that is not an issue....
....and perhaps that is where there is a difference...in that it is permissable for a "permanent" BBQ..but not those that can be rolled around...

Logic, i know nothing about propane, but have had 2 natural gas lines connected to my weber grills, and they weren't stationary...But i can see where what you describe could be a problem...The times i have done this, the natural gas line was "plumbed" thru the wall, and then a shutoff/connection valave was installed..Then the gas grill was connected to that...All according to code

Wow, lots of feedback. Thank you.
I don't think I'll pursue this, but if I do, I'll let you know.

Now, to set things straight. The patio paving company did NOT break the pipe. They only unearthed it.
The 18-inch depth for gas lines has been in place in Upland, California (where I live) for at least 30 years that I know of.
Also, we did hire one of those house inspectors guys (at the suggestion of the seller's realtor), byt the contract doesn't cover anything that can't be seen. So that was a waste.

logic, you do make a good point. Do unto others is always the best policy. But the situation is not quite that cut and dried. Remember, the seller was not stating that he believed the condo was generally safe and sound. He was using the gas connection as a selling point, just as one would point out a walk-in closet or solid granite countertops. "Look, see the gas connection for a barbecue . . . and it's to code." This remark was unsolicited when it was made. Had he bothered to mention that he really had no evidence what so ever of the fact, we most surely would have had it inspected (i.e. gone to the city to see anyone had taken out a permit).

As far as the do-unto-others point of view, think of it this way: Let's say I sell a house and in an attempt to entice the buyers I tell them, "There's a million dollars worth of gold directly under the patio." Then the buyers dig up the patio and find nothing. Am I free of blame because the pre-existing condition was that there never was any gold under the patio? Yes, I know this is out in left field, but I think it illustrates my point. Just as the gold was a selling point, so too was the gas line.

Another thing, there's a reason people have to bury a gas pipe so deeply. Hmmmm. Since it was not to code, it's obvious that a permit was not taken out. This is illegal, right? And I know where to find the guy who owned the house before our sellers did.

Lastly, and I think this has nothing to do with the situation, but I find it interesting that when I first went to the realtor to ask how I could get in touch with the sellers, the realtor said she would deliver the letter, but would not supply an address. That seemed reasonable to me, but the sellers did not respond thru the mail. Instead, they chose to send the response back through the realtor so as to eliminate the need for a return address. It took me most of one evening to search the internet for their address. Why do you suppose they're ducking me? As I mentioned before, my letter was VERY kind.

Again, it's not the money, so much as the shady way in which they responded (It was not worded very nicely, either)

Oh, well. Live and learn. If nothing else, you all have given me a way to get it off my chest. Thanks.

Maybe its me, but I've always viewed things as buyer beware. If I bought my house and they knowingly misrepresented then I would be pissed. However, from the sound of it, they were told it was to code, it wasn't something they did, it was preexisting to them even.

I did all the electrical work on my house. Is it to code? based upon my opinion, yes. I put in more than the required outlets, used the appropriate guage wire and breakers, did not overload, no box-fill issues. Would I feel comfortable telling someone that its A-OK, yes. However, I'm willing to bet, if someone ripped down a few walls, they might find something... maybe I didn't staple enough, maybe I drilled a hole too close to something.

Point is, people make mistakes, people misinterpert, and people shortcut. They may have gotten the permit and b/c the contractor is on a first name basis with the inspector, maybe it was passed.

It could have been completely exposed and obviously not to code, and frankly you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Verbal seller statements are worth the paper they are printed on, same as, yes the fence in the back is yours and on your property and the guy to your right is a nice guy.

"Why do you suppose they're ducking me?"

Because a seller usually doesn't want to deal with the buyer after closing, especially about a contentious issue.

well, the previous owner should have just get his/her mouth shut, but i am not sure,imho, a gas line to a bbq is actually a selling point..Nice to have,no doubt, but i would not even give it a second thought if i were interested in the property..

OK. I was naive - or perhaps just plain stupid. Up until now, the first and only house I ever purchased was in 1970 - brand new. Looking back on it, you'd think I would have been more careful.

But gosh, jridh, not that stupid! It was meant to be a rhetorical question

Thanks again for letting me vent.

oldalgebra, I would never have thought that was a rhetorical question, followed as it was by a comment about how kind you are.

I'm glad you could vent here. That's the best thing about this forum.

And I understand your frustration.

I didn't mean to indicate I was a kind person (although I don't view myself as an meanie either). I only meant that the letter was not ranting or even demanding. It only explained the course of events and ended with the sentence, "I hope you respond appropriately." I did not suggest that I would ever contact a lawyer or go to court.

Funny how the comment of a complete stranger and embarrass the heck out of a person. I didn't realize I came off as a holier-than-thou person. For that I beg everyone's pardon and I will certainly watch myself closer in the future.

My comment wasn't meant to be sarcastic.

It is called "Closing" for a reason. The seller has closed this chapter and moved on.
If you come back and complain about something that trivial ($500 per your own comment; given how expensive a house is - in CA of all places - that's like nothing in the big picture) I, were I the seller, would have not even responded to your letter.

I didn't mean to indicate I was a kind person (although I don't view myself as an meanie either). I only meant that the letter was not ranting or even demanding. It only explained the course of events and ended with the sentence, "I hope you respond appropriately." I did not suggest that I would ever contact a lawyer or go to court.

Funny how the comment of a complete stranger and embarrass the heck out of a person. I didn't realize I came off as a holier-than-thou person. For that I beg everyone's pardon and I will certainly watch myself closer in the future.

What got me in your original post was your last line..
Do I have a case for small claims?

Without going back and reading.. someone else had said, what if it was you that sold the house, thinking the gas line was a plus then the new owner redid the patio and came at you for the $500?

I don't think I'll pursue this, but if I do, I'll let you know.

But the situation is not quite that cut and dried. Remember, the seller was not stating that he believed the condo was generally safe and sound. He was using the gas connection as a selling point, just as one would point out a walk-in closet or solid granite countertops. "Look, see the gas connection for a barbecue . . . and it's to code." This remark was unsolicited when it was made. Had he bothered to mention that he really had no evidence what so ever of the fact, we most surely would have had it inspected (i.e. gone to the city to see anyone had taken out a permit).

Another thing, there's a reason people have to bury a gas pipe so deeply. Hmmmm. Since it was not to code, it's obvious that a permit was not taken out. This is illegal, right? And I know where to find the guy who owned the house before our sellers did.

Again, it's not the money, so much as the shady way in which they responded (It was not worded very nicely, either)

Oh, well. Live and learn. If nothing else, you all have given me a way to get it off my chest. Thanks.

I can understand where you are coming from, really.. you had an added expense after doing work on your house. You tried to contact the sellers and were pretty much blown off so now you're mad..

I'm ok with venting but taking someone to court over $500? If you did this for one it's a he said, she said.. next you are paying an attorney to prove a point. Attorneys usually charge $200 an hour up. You're then going to be into this gas line for who knows how many thousands of dollars. Hardly worth it to me.

I highly doubt you can prove who actually put the gas line in. Do you really need more of a headache?