Seller Semantics

According to my contacts at Edina Title, a couple recent closings have hiccupped over the Seller’s well disclosure.

Make that, the lack of such a disclosure.

In each case, the Seller was under the impression that, because the well on their property had been sealed, it was appropriate to check “No” in the section of the Minnesota Seller Disclosure asking about the existence of a well.


In fact, the appropriate response is “yes,” with an additional disclosure documenting the related details (essentially, “who,” “what,” “where,” and “when”) also required.

Once the title folks confirm that the state has a record of the well being sealed, all is  . . . umm, well.   😉

P.S.:  I handled one deal earlier this year where the Seller’s failure to disclose what was clearly a well on the premises — combined with some other disclosure “oversights” — seriously (and unnecessarily) complicated the purchase negotiations.

About the author

Ross Kaplan has 19+ years experience selling real estate all over the Twin Cities. He is also a 12-time consecutive "Super Real Estate Agent," as determined by Mpls. - St. Paul Magazine and Twin Cities Business Magazine. Prior to becoming a Realtor, Ross was an attorney (corporate law), CPA, and entrepreneur. He holds an economics degree from Stanford.

Leave a Reply