Independent review protecting buyers and sellers in Michigan residential transactions. Coventry Enterprises LLC examines disclosure compliance, broker conduct, and transactional fairness.
Submit a Residential MatterResidential real estate is where most people encounter the market. Buying or selling a home is a significant financial and personal event for most families, and it happens in a framework of laws, professional obligations, and contractual requirements that most homebuyers and sellers do not fully understand before they are already in the middle of a transaction.
Coventry Enterprises LLC focuses much of its review work on residential transactions for exactly this reason. The stakes are high for the individuals involved, the opportunities for mistreatment are real, and the oversight mechanisms that are supposed to prevent problems are not always functioning the way they should.
Jack Bodenstein established the committee with the Detroit residential market specifically in mind. He had observed, firsthand and systematically, the ways in which sellers omitted material disclosures, agents failed their clients, and lenders presented terms that were not accurately explained to borrowers. The committee was built to document those failures and provide independent accountability for them.
Michigan's Seller Disclosure Act (MCL 565.951 through MCL 565.965) is the primary statutory protection for residential buyers. The Act requires sellers of residential property to complete a disclosure statement covering specified categories of property conditions and known defects before the buyer is bound by a purchase agreement. The seller must provide the completed disclosure form to the buyer, and the buyer has a right to rescind the agreement if material disclosures are made or modified after the agreement is signed.
The disclosure form covers a wide range of conditions. Among the required disclosure categories are:
The committee reviews whether seller disclosure forms were completed accurately and whether the timing of disclosure met the statutory requirements. Forms that were incomplete, forms where known conditions were not disclosed, and forms that contained false representations are all findings that the committee documents with specific reference to the evidence.
Michigan's residential buyers have meaningful protections under the disclosure act and under federal lending laws. But protections only work if the parties responsible for honoring them actually do so, and if violations are identified and documented when they occur.
Buyers have a right to conduct a property inspection, and properly structured purchase agreements protect that right through inspection contingencies. The inspection contingency gives the buyer time to hire a licensed inspector, receive the inspection report, and negotiate based on what the inspection reveals. Buyers who waive inspection contingencies without fully understanding the consequences are more vulnerable to undisclosed defects. Agents who pressure buyers to waive inspections without adequate explanation may have violated their professional obligations.
Federal law requires that mortgage lenders provide buyers with a Loan Estimate disclosing key loan terms within three business days of receiving a loan application, and a Closing Disclosure at least three business days before closing. These requirements are designed to give borrowers time to review and understand their loan before they are legally committed to it. When loan terms are not accurately disclosed on these documents, or when fees appear at closing that were not disclosed in advance, compliance issues arise.
Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act and federal fair housing law prohibit discrimination in real estate transactions based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and familial status. The committee's reviews include attention to whether any patterns in transaction conduct suggest discriminatory practice.
The committee's experience in the Detroit residential market has produced a clear picture of where violations concentrate.
The most common violation type the committee identifies is incomplete disclosure forms. The pattern is consistent: sellers or their agents leave disclosure form sections blank, write "unknown" for conditions that the seller actually knew about, or check "no" for conditions where evidence in other documents suggests the answer should have been "yes." Roof leaks, water intrusion, foundation issues, and prior pest infestations are common examples of conditions that appear in inspection reports or prior permits but are absent from disclosure forms.
Some sellers disclose known problems after the purchase agreement is signed, knowing that many buyers will not exercise their right to rescind even when they legally could. The timing of disclosure matters under Michigan law. A seller who knew of a material condition at the time of contracting but disclosed it only after the buyer was contractually committed has not complied with the spirit of the disclosure requirement.
Buyer's agents who do not explain to their clients what the disclosure form means, what conditions are required to be disclosed, and what the buyer's right of rescission covers are failing in their professional obligations. Coventry Enterprises has reviewed transactions where buyers did not know they had a right to rescind based on material disclosure modifications because their agent never explained that right.
Listing agents sometimes describe properties in terms that are inconsistent with what the seller's disclosure form or inspection reports show. Describing a property with documented water intrusion as "move-in ready" may constitute misrepresentation. The committee reviews marketing materials alongside disclosure forms and inspection reports to identify these inconsistencies.
Independent oversight creates accountability in markets where accountability would otherwise be insufficient. When sellers and their agents know that transactions can be reviewed by an independent committee, and that violations will be documented with specific evidence and standards, the incentive to cut corners is reduced.
For buyers who have already experienced problems, the committee's review provides documentation that can support their position in any subsequent proceedings. An independent finding that a seller failed to disclose a known condition is more useful than the buyer's unsupported assertion that the seller knew and said nothing.
The committee's educational resources also serve residential buyers before problems occur. The buyer education page provides guidance on what buyers should know and do at each stage of a residential purchase. Knowledge is the most effective prevention for the kinds of problems the committee reviews after the fact.
Sellers also benefit from understanding their obligations clearly. The seller resources page provides guidance on disclosure requirements and what sellers need to do to ensure their transactions meet applicable standards.
Michigan home buyers are protected by the Seller Disclosure Act, which requires sellers to disclose known material defects. Buyers represented by agents are entitled to competent representation including advice on disclosure review and inspection. Federal lending laws protect borrowers from misleading loan term disclosures. And Michigan's civil rights law prohibits discriminatory conduct in real estate transactions.
The most common violations the committee identifies are incomplete or inaccurate seller disclosure forms, failure to disclose known property defects, misrepresentation of property condition in marketing materials, inadequate buyer representation by licensed agents, and loan terms not accurately disclosed at origination. These patterns appear consistently across the Detroit residential market.
There is no fixed time limit on submissions, but document availability decreases over time. The committee can advise on what is feasible based on your specific situation and what documents you still have available. Even with limited documentation, a partial review may be possible and useful.
Contact Coventry Enterprises LLC to discuss submitting the matter for review. Include whatever documentation you have: the disclosure form, inspection reports, any communications with the seller or their agent, and any evidence of the leak and its history. The committee can evaluate whether the documentation supports a finding of disclosure failure. You should also consult a Michigan real estate attorney about your legal options, as there may be time limits on claims under Michigan law.
Yes. The presence of a buyer's agent in a transaction does not preclude review. In fact, many residential reviews involve questions about whether the buyer's agent properly represented their client's interests. Agent conduct is a separate subject of review from seller disclosure compliance, and both can be examined in the same review.
Coventry Enterprises LLC reviews residential real estate transactions across Michigan. Contact the committee to discuss your situation and whether a formal review is appropriate.
Contact the Committee Buyer Education