If you’re in a caveat emptor state, which statement about property condition disclosures is true?

The legal doctrine of caveat emptor, Latin for "let the buyer beware," places the burden of due diligence squarely on the buyer. In a state that strictly adheres to this principle, the seller is not legally obligated to volunteer information or proactively disclose defects in the property. The buyer is responsible for conducting inspections and discovering any issues. While a seller cannot actively conceal defects or commit fraud (e.g., lie when asked a direct question), they have no affirmative duty to speak up about problems. Most states, including Maryland, have statutorily modified or replaced this doctrine with mandatory disclosure laws.

B. The seller must conduct a home inspection in addition to providing disclosure forms.

This is incorrect. Under caveat emptor, the responsibility to conduct inspections falls upon the buyer, not the seller.

C. The seller must proactively disclose any known defects.

This is incorrect. This describes the legal standard in states that have specifically rejected the caveat emptor doctrine in favor of mandatory seller disclosure laws.

D. The seller must proactively disclose any known defects and the seller must have a home inspection conducted.

This is incorrect as it combines two requirements that are contrary to the principles of caveat emptor.

1. Maryland Real Property Article, § 10-702. This Maryland statute requires sellers of certain residential properties to provide either a disclosure or a disclaimer statement. This law is an example of a legislative departure from the common law doctrine of caveat emptor, illustrating that proactive disclosure (as mentioned in options C and D) is a feature of non-caveat emptor jurisdictions.

2. Roberts, E. F. (1981). "The Case of the Unwary Home Buyer: The Housing Merchant Did It". Cornell Law Review, 67(4), 835-841. This article discusses the historical context of caveat emptor in real estate, stating, "At common law the vendor of a completed house was not responsible for its condition... The rule was caveat emptor" (p. 835). This supports the principle that the seller had no duty to disclose.

3. Powell, R. R., & Wolf, M. A. (2023). Powell on Real Property. LexisNexis. In Volume 10, Chapter 84A, "The Real Estate Contract," the text explains that the traditional rule of caveat emptor imposed no duty on the seller to disclose defects, though exceptions for fraudulent misrepresentation or active concealment existed. The modern trend, however, is toward mandatory disclosure.