Hey guys, had an issue come up at my condo I just bought and am needing to consult with a lawyer if anyone knows a good one? Details on the situation below if anyone's interested.
During the inspection process of our 2 bed 2 bath condo in Inglewood, we noticed some discoloration and moisture marks in the top corner of the master bedroom closet. The inspector believed the moisture marks were from an active plumbing leak, likely to be from the unit above, and to contact the owner about it. Shortly after receiving this news, we contacted the owner above our unit and he said he'd get the leak fixed as soon as we closed on the property. Once we got the keys, we hired an asbestosis abatement company to remove materials which tested positive (e.g., drywall in the guest and master bathroom). The abatement company found that the drywall was completely soaked, and once removed, confirmed that there was an active leak from the unit above. The joists and studs were extremely waterlogged, rotting and covered in mold. We had the bathrooms and adjacent areas tested for mold, and the lab results identified high levels of mold, including those that are dangerous to human health.
The owner does not have insurance, and was previously cooperating to pay for the damages, but is now renouncing liability. The costs involved to fix this situation included mold remediation, potentially replacing some of the water damaged studs/joists, and replacing the drywall.
Note: The owner rents out his unit. He claims he heard/knew the leak over a year ago and knocked on our unit's door to tell the occupant, but no one answered. He took no further action to tell anyone or fix the leak.
Question: We're trying to understand where liability falls in this situation. We were under the impression that the owner upstairs is liable for the damages as the leak is coming from his unit. He knew about the leak and did nothing to fix it, and didn't make any effort to inform anyone other than knocking on the door once (which there is no evidence of).
However, we believe he is alleging that we bought the property "as is" and therefore, that we assume all costs to fix the property despite the source of the damage stemming from his unit. We do not agree with this, but would like to get clarification.
