Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

There are a lot more facts that need to be reviewed before anyone can opine that the Seller failed to meet the required duty of care when it comes to disclosing adverse conditions on the property. Clearly, if they knew about it they had an obligation to disclose it. If they did not, then in the Natural Hazard and Property Disclosures, there is usually a general statement to the effect that you need to investigate the potential for the presence of items such as underground storage tanks. If the tank was registered, then there is a public record of it, and it would have been incumbent upon you to review those public records. Otherwise, it is possible that they had no knowledge and that you were the first to discover it. You need to consult with a qualified real estate attorney in your area and review substantially more facts than can be done on this forum.

*Due to the limitations of the LawGuru Forums, The Gibbs Law Firm, APC's (the "Firm") participation in responding to questions posted herein does not constitute legal advice, nor legal representation of the person or entity posting a question. No Attorney/Client relationship is or shall be construed to be created hereby. The information provided is general and requires that the poster obtain specific legal advice from an attorney. The poster shall not rely upon the information provided herein as legal advice nor as the basis for making any decisions of legal consequence. As required by 11 U.S.C. �528, we must now disclose that, "We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code. Assistance we provide with respect to Debt Relief may involve bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code."

You may have a claim against the seller for fraud in non-disclosure, but you'd have to prove they knew or should have known. There's a claim against the title company for a records search that didn't identify the problem. The most likely scenario is lawsuit against the seller and everyone involved in the sale , primarily for either, cost of cleanup, or rescission of the contract as an alternative. If serious about taking such legal action, feel free to contact me.

None of the previous answers has quite hit the mark. Under CERCLA, TSCA, and other environmental laws you could be ordered to pay vast sums of money for the clean-up of hazardous substances on your property even if you were without fault. It is imperative that the attorney you consult with should be very familiar with this specialized area of the law (I am not), and in all probability you will need to sue the previous property owner, and possibly others, to make them pay for the cleanup. Do not use a lawyer who does not regularly practice environmental law. Call your insurance carrier. Watch out for legal time limits.