A Step In The Right Direction

By David Hamerslough and Victoria B. Naidorf

C.A.R.’s June form release included revisions to the Seller Property Questionnaire (SPQ). The primary revision is to Paragraph 5, entitled “Documents.” While C.A.R.’s release summary describes this revision as a “reformatting” of this paragraph, the revision adds three new questions to Paragraph 5. Collectively, the revision is a step in the right direction in addressing some of the issues we have had and have expressed to C.A.R. regarding Paragraph 5.

We have written articles in the past about issues with Paragraph 5, including last month, when we discussed sellers not fully understanding Paragraph 5, resulting in claims involving cancellation and non-disclosure. This article generally discusses the June 26 revision to Paragraph 5 and some of the issues that sellers still need to consider when responding to this paragraph.

What Has Been Revised In The “Documents” Paragraph?

The prior version of this paragraph was one long question with multiple subparts set off by commas, parentheticals, and romanettes. The entire question was in the disjunctive, meaning that there were multiple subparts, questions, and issues for the seller to consider in making their response. One concern we had was with the format/structure of this paragraph because sellers would often focus only on the first or second subpart/question/issue and fail to realize that the question was much broader. Sellers would also often miss the distinction between current and historical documents. These are two examples of where sellers often did not appreciate the scope/breadth of this paragraph.

C.A.R.’s reformatting of the paragraph by breaking down some of the subparts of the Documents paragraph into seven separate romanettes/subparagraphs is an attempt to help sellers appreciate the scope and breadth of the question. Sellers still need to realize that many of the seven romanettes/subparagraphs still contain separate subparts/questions/issues for their consideration and that each of them is still in the disjunctive and therefore includes multiple subject subparts/questions/issues.

In addition to this “reformatting,” C.A.R. has added three new questions to the Documents paragraph that appear to focus the seller on historical documents. Each question asks the seller if they are “aware” of a certain category of documents. The first, (A), is directed at documents regarding the property that were prepared before the seller’s ownership. The second, (B), is directed at documents regarding the property that were prepared for the seller during the seller’s ownership. The third, (C), is directed at documents regarding the property that were provided by others during the seller’s ownership. This question parenthetically identifies documents obtained by potential buyers as an example of a document responsive to this question. If the seller is aware of any documents responsive to Paragraph 5, then the seller is required to “explain” that awareness.

As with the previous version of this paragraph, the June revision retains the “Note” that advises the seller that if they have answered any of these questions in the affirmative, they are to provide any such documents in their possession to the buyer. The December 2025 revision added language to this note referencing the C.A.R. Receipt For Reports (RFR) as a way to identify any such document(s). The June revision also adds that the seller may provide an explanation “to provide context” regarding any such document(s). What is unclear is whether the explanation to “provide context” referred to in the note is intended to be used in connection with the RFR or also refers to the seller’s obligation to explain any affirmative response.

What Sellers Should Consider When Filling Out The “Documents” Paragraph

• The Documents paragraph asks the seller to (1) indicate whether they are aware of any documents and, if so, explain those documents and (2) provide any such documents in their possession to the buyer.

A question remains regarding what is an “explanation” of an affirmative answer. Is the seller to identify the document(s) in some way? Should the seller explain the document(s) or “provide context”? If so, how?

Typically, sellers who have answered Question 5 in the affirmative have identified current inspection reports (e.g., home, pest, roof, etc.) in a general way. Given the scope and breadth of this paragraph, both in its prior versions and in this revision, a seller should be identifying any historical documents that they are also aware of. For example, if there are multiple inspection reports, both historical and current, the seller should attempt to identify them in a way that makes that distinction. As we will see below, the potential scope of these historical documents may be very broad. In identifying a document, sellers should limit this identification to the title of a document, its date, its author, and possibly the number of pages. Sellers should not, however, attempt to summarize the document or its contents or characterize it in any way. The documents identified should speak for themselves.

With regard to the production of any documents in the seller’s possession, we recommend that a seller organize all these documents in chronological order with a chronological cover sheet indicating the information mentioned above and providing this documentation to their agent so that it can be uploaded to a pre-sale document platform for review, evaluation, and approval by the buyer. Doing so prior to the offer eliminates a buyer’s right to terminate based upon any such disclosure that is received after the offer is delivered. We also recommend that any such documents be identified and included as part of a substituted disclosure in Section 1 of the TDS.

• The scope of the documents is not limited to those specified in the first two lines of the paragraph. Documents are still described in the disjunctive as including any “reports, inspections, disclosures, warranties, maintenance recommendations, estimates, studies, or surveys ….” The term “Documents” is used to create a definition, but that definition is not limited to just the documents named in this paragraph.

  This is due to the reference to “or other documents” at the end of this list. Sellers need to understand that the reference to “or other documents” includes, among others, any document that pertains to any of the subparts/questions/issues covered in all of the subparts and questions of Paragraph 5. This expands the definition of “Documents” to include, among others, emails, text messages, photographs, videos, social media postings, the TDS, a Supplemental Seller’s Checklist (SSC), SPQs, Exempt Seller Disclosures (ESDs), Natural Hazard Disclosure Statements (NHDSs), lead addendums, Agent Visual Inspection Disclosures (AVIDs), or any other written statement of knowledge about the property completed by anyone. The term “reports” is broad enough to include structural pest, general home inspection, contractor inspection, geological or soils reports, roof, pool/spa, septic, well, chimney, engineering, safety, lead or other environmental hazards, or any other report or study regarding those subparts/questions/issues within the question as well as Questions A, B, and C. The term “or other documents” also includes notices, letters or rulings from any governmental entity, proposals, bids, estimates, invoices, billing statements, contracts, plans, drawings, pictures in any format, informational and operational manuals, permits, letters, etc. Sellers need to understand the scope and breadth of not only those documents that C.A.R. has specified in the question but also what may be part of “or other documents.”

• Sellers need to understand that Questions A and B include documents whether they are or are not in the seller’s possession. If they are the in the seller’s possession, they need to be provided to the buyer. For example, a document that might be responsive to Question B includes documents in the possession of the seller’s agent, a contractor, an engineer, an architect, etc.

• Sellers need to understand that the scope of documents that the seller may be aware of in response to Question C is potentially much broader than just the example included in the parenthetical referring to documents obtained by potential buyers. These documents could include documents from neighbors, government agencies, contractors, etc.

  It is unclear whether Question C is intended to be limited to documents provided just to the seller or if it includes documents provided to other third parties. The more narrow interpretation may explain why Question C doesn’t distinguish between documents in the possession of the seller and those not in the possession of the seller. If the broader interpretation is intended, then documents not in the seller’s possession would need to be considered by the seller in responding to this question.

• One way for sellers to start to understand the scope of the information and/or documents being requested is to organize their documents chronologically and in three categories. The first is any documents from when the seller acquired the property. The second is any documents during the seller’s ownership of the property. The third is any documents from the time that the seller starts getting the property prepared for sale and listed for sale.

Other Revisions To The SPQ

• Paragraph 8(C) has been added to the SPQ to have the seller identify whether the property has a septic system, well, or propane tank. If so, the seller is to provide a new C.A.R. form (the SWPI-Q), which is a questionnaire regarding those particular systems. C.A.R. has also created a new form regarding the allocation of costs relating to the inspection, evaluation, and repair of any of those systems.
• Paragraph 18(E) now contains an additional question for tenant-occupied properties. In that situation, the seller is asked to identify if they have any photographs from the beginning of the tenancy and any move-in reports. If so, these documents are to be provided.

Claims regarding Paragraph 5 arise because of a number of facts and circumstances, including the knowledge, training, skill, and experience of the seller and the seller’s agent, the length of time the seller has occupied the property, the sellers’ document retention practices, and the seller’s understanding of the scope and breadth of Paragraph 5. The June 2026 revisions to the Documents question in the SPQ are a step in the right direction, and we hope that this will enable sellers to better understand and respond to this question in the future. As we have previously done, we will be contacting C.A.R. regarding the observations we have made in this article, and others, regarding the revision to the Documents question and hope that they will be receptive to making additional revisions. As always, we will keep you updated.

Enjoy your Fourth of July.