Two words prevent all problems like this: Due Diligence!

STORY: This happened in Hillsborough, CA (The Bay Area) Back in 2000, when people were buying 1/4 acre parcels to subdivide only they all went on the assumption they were all uniformly 1/4 acre parcels and guess what?

Yep!

And because some were not true 1/4 parcels, no subdivision but the buyers paid on spec pricing for the subdivide so basically they way over paid for one lot with a huge yard!

This is what Title Insurance is all about i.e. giving clear title & insuring it. When you run the preliminary report, this type of stuff comes up. What to do after that is what agents do or don't do. On the city, they can change their position on anything, at any time without liability. THINK: fighting city hall. The safest way to proceed is to examine what already exists. That tells you what is allowed. Will they approve it? Will there be neighborhood opposition? Does the land have hidden problems? Due/do diligence

Get a survey and hired an attorney.

GULP! 

Ugh . . . there SHOULD have been a disclosure that the parcel was landlocked.
The buyers SHOULD have made the purchase subject to attaining an easement from the neighbor.
The buyer's agent SHOULD have helped conduct due diligence more extensively.
The buyers SHOULD have made the purchase subject to a survey and split cost with seller.
The buyers SHOULD have confirmed with City that they could use the land as they wish!
This is a cluster and I hope the buyers win. They were not treated fairly.

This is why land carries the highest liability for a broker. Without utility, land can be worthless!

RIGHT, Leanne Smith ?

!. Had an attorney 2. Ordered a survey. 3. Ordered a title commitment. 4. requested and reviewed a seller's disclosure. 

If they can show in court that the listing agent knew that the property landlocked the listing agent should lose their license and their broker sanctioned. 

The seller should reimburse them the purchase price plus any additional costs including attorney fees incurred.

The title company may also be on the hook.

There is a lot of due diligence that seems missed here.  They should have gone to the city and made absolutely sure they could build there, get utilities there, etc. and talked to the neighbor about getting a permanent easement.

1) Hired a skilled buyer's agent with a checklist of things that must be investigated prior to a sale - including access, and one that puts those contingency items in the contract

2) Gone to the appropriate city office and done some investigation themselves.

3) Waited to close until after their "email" was responded to.

GEEZ

Well, they definitely should have done more due diligence.

Due diligence and lots of it!

Oh My, let me count the things they should have done. 

In a nutshell, it is called DUE DILIGENCE. 

We cannot do too much of it.

     If there is only a scrawny grassy trail through the weeds to access land you hope to subdivide. There's your sign.

     And if you want the municipality to adopt and maintain the access road after you sell all the lots and pull down pack away the marketing tent. Then everything about access, the width, utility easements along it are the most important first step.

     Do I have a full blown easement spelling out the width, drainage and what the right of way provides for along it or not? Asking in an email that went to spam is not the once and done best practice subdividing raw land.

Essential Steps to Protect Yourself When Buying Land: Avoiding Common Pitfalls

Buying a property can be exciting, but it also requires thorough preparation. Before purchasing land, understanding easements is crucial. 

Always conduct a property survey. This step identifies any access issues or restrictions. In the case of landlocked properties, the absence of a legal access route can be a dealbreaker. 

Seek advice from a real estate attorney. While title agents facilitate closings, they may not fully represent your interests. An independent attorney can help clarify potential pitfalls. 

Research local zoning regulations. It's essential to know what can and cannot be built on the property. Engaging with the city planning department before buying can prevent future headaches.

Ask the seller direct questions about the property’s access. Clear communication may reveal issues that aren't readily apparent. 

Be cautious with properties marketed as “buildable.” Lofty dreams can lead to disappointment if the land doesn’t meet legal requirements. 

Lastly, always ensure that all disclosures are provided in writing. This creates a paper trail that can protect your interests if issues arise. 

In conclusion, protecting yourself during a real estate purchase involves due diligence, communication, and professional advice. Prioritize these steps to avoid situations like the one faced by the Florida couple.

Sure sounds like a law suit to me Fred Griffin Florida Real Estate .  I know Minot ND does all they can as a city to allow building on odd, non-conforming lots.

uhh..due diligence ; )

What shouldn't they have done!

It doesn't say whether or not they had a buyer's agent to guide them. I've seen properties for sale that were landlocked and advised the potential buyer. 

As for whether the seller or seller's agent should have disclosed, it depends on FL law.

So, they should have:

1) had a buyer's agent.

2) should have looked at a map 

3) Shouldn't have closed until they had additional information.

A lot of problems caused by govt disrespecting landowner rights.

Having a buyer's agent would have solved everything.  The agent would have insisted on a survey, and noticed the red flag of the title report with no legal access.

The purchase contact should have contained contingencies to allow the buyers to discover and resolve the unknown problems or back out if they could not.

sounds like they did no due diligence.

Here, a call to 311 (to speak to someone in planning to confirm proper 'use' of the property, obtain a survey and most certainly should have investigated a means of ingress & egress - obviously a survey would have remedied that issue with the fact that the property was landlocked. 

In NC, the survey survives the end of the Due Diligence Period. In other words, should the fact that the survey shows that the property is landlocked, the buyer would be entitled to their Due Diligence and Earnest Money refunded to them.

oh, definitely some due diligence.  I don't believe the seller wouldn't be liable for damages in Georgia.  We have laws about land locked property without an easement. 

Simple - they should've done their homework.

Donate the land and take the write-off