This question pertains to real estate law in the state of California. I recently purchased a house and moved in this past weekend. Yesterday, the first rain event of the season occurred, and several water leaks became readily apparent. The leaks occurred in spots where there was no existing evidence of past leakage. One leak is around a window sill and one is from the roof. During the inspection, we found no indication of any areas that might have had any existing water leaks, and this is something that I paid particular attention to.
When the seller signed the Transfer Disclosure Statement, they did not indicate any leaks or water damage. Before escrow closed, I was made aware that the seller had completed a variety of repairs including: pavement, new windows and roof repairs. It was my understanding, and the impression conveyed to me by both my and the seller's agents that the repairs were all related to marketability of the house.
My first thought is that I did not ask enough questions as to why the repairs were made. This brings me to my question. Is the seller required to have disclosed any existing known issues if repairs were made to correct those issues? Also, if it turns out that the repairs made did not correct the original issue, does that change what the seller should have disclosed?