Joy and Austin: This One Time At Family Camp

[Absolom]

9 hours ago, lascuba said:

That was always just a cover because TLC had to pretend that they actually cancelled the show. There's not a doubt in my mid that TLC called JB to tell him that they were going to announce cancellation, but don't worry, thy were working on a new name, and while he and Michelle would have to lay low for a while, they'll gradually work them back in.

They changed the name of the show, but not the underlying contracts.

[lascuba]

I don't buy for a second that TLC cared at all about "punishing survivors."  19K was their cash cow and they weren't going to lose it.

3 hours ago, Chicklet said:

I don't think it's fair to judge Jill for being the tattletale of the family, her parents created that role and supported it for her. Should she still be doing it now would be another story.

I like Jill, well I don't fangirl all over her but she's not the most odious person I know of. What kids do as kids and what adults do as adults is what matters.

That really doesn't matter for those who grew up with her, though. Whatever the reasons for the sibling dynamics, the effects are what they are and you can't just change your feeling about your siblings when those feelings had 2+ decades to settle in. They all have the same parents. They grew up with the same fucked up rules. Jill's inherent personality was particularly well suited for those rules and it made her a pain in the ass to live with. Jill ON CAMERA would call out her siblings for saying things that weren't "godly" enough...imagine what she was like behind closed doors. Her siblings wouldn't be wrong to not feel close to her now because of that.

[DangerousMinds]

9 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I think TLC was between a rock and a hard place after scandal #1 hit. If they cancelled the show they were punishing 4 survivors, yet they couldn't keep Josh on the air and they were hearing the hate and blame toward JB & M. Plus this show made TLC money. I think TLC cares much more about their own reputation and money than they do about the families they film. Creating Jill and Jessa Counting On, checked TLC's boxes by keeping the money coming in and not punishing victims of sexual assault. I'm guessing once TLC realized how boring they were even, with Jinger's courtship in the works, they tested the waters by featuring more siblings and letting JB & M appear here and there. 

Then there was Derick. I'm not sure when they dropped Jill and Jessa from the name, but the rumblings of Derick may have had something to do with it.

JB may have power over his adult children through finances and some unearned respect, but I don't think he holds any power with TLC or is highly respected by them.

Personally I think TLC made the right decision. The girls did nothing wrong and cancelling the show would have punished them for something their brother did and for what many believe their parents didn't do.

I don’t see TLC canceling the show as “punishing” the girls. 2 had husbands by then who were supposed to be “providing” for them, with the other 2 soon to follow.

[lascuba]

9 minutes ago, DangerousMinds said:

I don’t see TLC canceling the show as “punishing” the girls. 2 had husbands by then who were supposed to be “providing” for them, with the other 2 soon to follow.

And those same 2 took part in a disastrous interview where they completed dismissed sexual abuse among siblings as so common place that it wasn't a big deal. 

[Zella]

Just now, lascuba said:

And those same 2 took part in a disastrous interview where they completed dismissed sexual abuse among siblings as so common place that it wasn't a big deal. 

That whole interview was so disturbing on many levels, but when they started asserting how common this was, I got deeply creeped out. I don't know if that is something they were told from the beginning or if it was the strategy they settled on to counter the scandal breaking, but the fact they both seemed to repeat that as if it was a perfectly normal and valid defense tells me a lot (and none of it good) about Gothard families. 

[Tikichick]

11 minutes ago, lascuba said:

And those same 2 took part in a disastrous interview where they completed dismissed sexual abuse among siblings as so common place that it wasn't a big deal. 

 

8 minutes ago, Zella said:

That whole interview was so disturbing on many levels, but when they started asserting how common this was, I got deeply creeped out. I don't know if that is something they were told from the beginning or if it was the strategy they settled on to counter the scandal breaking, but the fact they both seemed to repeat that as if it was a perfectly normal and valid defense tells me a lot (and none of it good) about Gothard families. 

I give sexual assault victims a lot of grace as far as their reactions and statements about what they've been through.   I give particular grace to child victims and those who are used to a dynamic where they have little to no agency or control over their lives, have no independent means of support, nor any skills or education to draw upon for striking out on their own and building a career and supporting themselves.  

Sexual abuse and assault alone are big enough burdens for many to overcome.   It's no wonder those laden with other burdens struggle or cannot see another way out. 

[Zella]

14 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

 

I give sexual assault victims a lot of grace as far as their reactions and statements about what they've been through.   I give particular grace to child victims and those who are used to a dynamic where they have little to no agency or control over their lives, have no independent means of support, nor any skills or education to draw upon for striking out on their own and building a career and supporting themselves.  

Sexual abuse and assault alone are big enough burdens for many to overcome.   It's no wonder those laden with other burdens struggle or cannot see another way out. 

I was also the victim of childhood sexual assault, so I'm not unsympathetic to them and their struggles. It doesn't make the statement any less disturbing. I think it is abominable that someone (I assume their parents) told them this bullshit to minimize the abuse they experienced and that the environment they grew up in apparently didn't contradict this information either.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Zella

[Chicklet]

3 hours ago, lascuba said:

That really doesn't matter for those who grew up with her, though. Whatever the reasons for the sibling dynamics, the effects are what they are and you can't just change your feeling about your siblings when those feelings had 2+ decades to settle in

I had fucked up parents and a fucked up brother who was the king and I pretty much hated him except I now have maturity to realize it wasn't his doing. I grew up. You can change your feelings about siblings if you are an adult. He will never be my best friend but yea I know better now.

The Duggars- you get what you get, there is little emotional maturity going on in that entire family so  they will always relate to their siblings in the infantile manner  they always have.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Chicklet

[BigBingerBro]

I personally think that TLC is just as disgusting as this family is.  The entire idea of a show should have been shut down never to be revisted again once the Josh-bomb broke.  Maybe that's an unpopular opinion, but it makes me sick seeing these people relish in having the ability to show themselves on TV as such caring, Christlike people, when in reality, they are the complete opposite.

[GeeGolly]

3 hours ago, DangerousMinds said:

I don’t see TLC canceling the show as “punishing” the girls. 2 had husbands by then who were supposed to be “providing” for them, with the other 2 soon to follow.

Even if that were true it still wouldn't look good to cancel a show because a tabloid magazine made public four sisters were molested in childhood. I think a good many folks, even some who dislike the Duggars would have had negative feelings about that. A lot of folks would have seen it as getting fired for being a victim of sexual assault.

@lascuba, I think we're saying the same thing. I said TLC puts money and reputation before any of the families they employ. 

@Zella, It was a few years ago when I watched the interview, but I don't remember being bothered about Jessa and Jill saying its common. Maybe because as a therapist I often tell my clients, you're not alone, this has happened to others, this is more common than you think, in regard to a lot of topics I may be speaking to them about. Familial molestation may not be as common as work place sexual harassment, but its likely more common than being a victim of much of what is shown on Dateline (trying to stay delicate here). Folks just don't share this type of secret with many.

Edited December 20, 2020 by GeeGolly

[DangerousMinds]

15 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

I personally think that TLC is just as disgusting as this family is.  The entire idea of a show should have been shut down never to be revisted again once the Josh-bomb broke.  Maybe that's an unpopular opinion, but it makes me sick seeing these people relish in having the ability to show themselves on TV as such caring, Christlike people, when in reality, they are the complete opposite.

Agree! Or TLC could actually show the reality of this family, instead of a whitewashed version.

[rue721]

1 hour ago, Chicklet said:

You can change your feelings about siblings if you are an adult. He will never be my best friend but yea I know better now.

I totally agree, and I also agree that it's complicated with the Duggars because so many of them have such arrested development.

Also, I feel like the sibling relationships among this family are probably a bit different than most families, because the siblings basically parented each other. Just from what we saw on the specials and show, the Duggars seemed to me to run their household like a religiously repressive orphanage. I mean, the kids were/are better off than orphans obviously, but it seems more like an orphanage than a regular home to me in a lot of ways, what with the kids having no personal belongings and being subjected to one-size-fits-all discipline and the family doing everything (school, work, religious/worship) in-house, etc. And there just being SO MANY of them, honestly. I feel like maybe how they relate now might be sort of a mix of regular sibling relationships and...I dunno, the relationships of people who grew up in an institution together, you know?

Also, I have no idea what goes on in Joy's head, but any complex feelings she might have toward her family of origin might be projected onto Jill, as the current family scapegoat and as a mother figure to her. I feel like in such a fear-based environment like the Duggars', it might be a relief to have a scapegoat (if it's not you, anyway) and also it might be especially scary to be friendly toward the scapegoat in case you catch their "cooties." Just a thought, although of course Joy probably would vehemently disagree with all that lol

[Zella]

15 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Even if that were true it still wouldn't look good to cancel a show because a tabloid magazine made public four sisters were molested in childhood. I think a good many folks, even some who dislike the Duggars would have had negative feelings about that. A lot of folks would have seen it as getting fired for being a victim of sexual assault.

@lascuba, I think we're saying the same thing. I said TLC puts money and reputation before any of the families they employ. 

@Zella, It was a few years ago when I watched the interview, but I don't remember being bothered about Jessa and Jill saying its common. Maybe because as a therapist I often tell my clients, you're not alone, this has happened to others, this is more common than you think, in regard to a lot of topics I may be speaking to them about. Familial molestation may not be as common as work place sexual harassment, but its likely more common than being a victim of much of what is shown on Dateline (trying to stay delicate here). Folks just don't share this type of secret with many.

I don't remember it being framed as "you're not alone," though. I remember the implications essentially being "most brothers molest their sisters, so get over it--no harm, no foul." And that's what bothered me. 

 

[GeeGolly]

1 minute ago, Zella said:

I don't remember it being framed as "you're not alone," though. I remember the implications essentially being "most brothers molest their sisters, so get over it--no harm, no foul." And that's what bothered me. 

 

Like I said, I don't really remember the nuances of the interview, but I didn't think they were saying that's a reason to take it lightly. My therapist brain heard more of a message of universality.

[Zella]

1 minute ago, GeeGolly said:

Like I said, I don't really remember the nuances of the interview, but I didn't think they were saying that's a reason to take it lightly. My therapist brain heard more of a message of universality.

Admittedly, it's been awhile since I watched it, too, and my memory tends to be more of my impressions than specific details. I also remember being really weirded out by Jessa's lack of response to Jill crying, even though I'm pretty inept at dealing with crying people too. 

I think I also found their phrasing dismissive because they kept making excuses about how the victims were asleep and it was over the clothing (both proven wrong in the police reports), but it was somehow as if that was also supposed to be less objectionable to attack you when you're asleep. 

[auntieminem]

That interview was awful and hard to watch. Jessa was so robotic and cold and Jill broke down crying while trying to say it was wrong but because of his age and curiosity it was not as bad.  I think they both were given a message and script; Jessa was able to get through it Jill not so much.  Also about Jill being a tattletale, wasn't she the one who caught Josh touching, one of the younger ones and told on him.  They should be glad at least that time she was a tattletale. 

Edited December 20, 2020 by auntieminem
tattletale is one word oops

[ginger90]

I put the interview in the media thread.

[DangerousMinds]

19 minutes ago, auntieminem said:

That interview was awful and hard to watch. Jessa was so robotic and cold and Jill broke down crying while trying to say it was wrong but because of his age and curiosity it was not as bad.  I think they both were given a message and script; Jessa was able to get through it Jill not so much.  Also about Jill being a tattle tale, wasn't she the one who caught Josh touching, one of the younger ones and told on him.  They should be glad at least that time she was a tattle tale. 

I agree. They owe Jill a lot for having had the courage to tell their parents about Josh. I wonder if any have ever thanked her? 😢

[Temperance]

On 12/17/2020 at 6:25 AM, Totally said:

How old is Ivy now? Could Jessa be pregnant, she has her wreath covering her stomach 🤔

Ivy is 18/19 months old and Jessa could easily be pregnant again with a child that age. 

[Growsonwalls]

2 hours ago, DangerousMinds said:

I agree. They owe Jill a lot for having had the courage to tell their parents about Josh. I wonder if any have ever thanked her? 😢

I know this sounds sick but ... they probably blame her. Because their parents probably blamed them. So they felt as if if Jill hadn't "told" they wouldn't have been shamed.

I also think Joy for whatever reason is super-invested in the idea of portraying the Duggar life as the Most Perfect Ever. She might blame Jill for chipping away at that perfect reputation.

Edited December 21, 2020 by Growsonwalls

[emmawoodhouse]

4 hours ago, Zella said:

I don't remember it being framed as "you're not alone," though. I remember the implications essentially being "most brothers molest their sisters, so get over it--no harm, no foul." And that's what bothered me. 

 

And they came armed with STATS! I think it was Jill who spit out that molestations happened in something like 2/3 of families. Of course, her source was never cited. 

[Growsonwalls]

I think it could have been a coping mechanism of Jill and Jessa to think this is normal and happens all the time. 

[Zella]

9 minutes ago, Growsonwalls said:

I think it could have been a coping mechanism of Jill and Jessa to think this is normal and happens all the time. 

I'm sure it was, but it doesn't make it any less disturbing to me. 

[lascuba]

5 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Even if that were true it still wouldn't look good to cancel a show because a tabloid magazine made public four sisters were molested in childhood. I think a good many folks, even some who dislike the Duggars would have had negative feelings about that. A lot of folks would have seen it as getting fired for being a victim of sexual assault.

I know it's a mistake to assume that the wider world and the internet agree on any given topic, but the overwhelming reaction to the scandal was calls for permanent cancellation. "Punishing" the victims wasn't part of the narrative at all.

5 hours ago, Zella said:

I don't remember it being framed as "you're not alone," though. I remember the implications essentially being "most brothers molest their sisters, so get over it--no harm, no foul." And that's what bothered me. 

 

That's exactly what it was. The entirely interview was a lambasting of the general public for daring to criticize how JB and Michelle handled things. Everything was so clearly scripted to let Josh off the hook and get the media off their backs.

5 hours ago, Zella said:

Admittedly, it's been awhile since I watched it, too, and my memory tends to be more of my impressions than specific details. I also remember being really weirded out by Jessa's lack of response to Jill crying, even though I'm pretty inept at dealing with crying people too. 

I think I also found their phrasing dismissive because they kept making excuses about how the victims were asleep and it was over the clothing (both proven wrong in the police reports), but it was somehow as if that was also supposed to be less objectionable to attack you when you're asleep. 

I've been saying this since that interview and at this point I'm convinced I'm the only one who feels this way, but I have to say it again...as someone who watched 19K from the very first special, I'm sure Jill's tears were 100% fake. Jill is a cryer. Always has been. I know what Jill looks like when she cries. That interview wasn't it. She was practically gouging her eye out trying to produce tears. Jessa's lack of response was completely reasonable, because they had rehearsed what they were going to say and Jill went off script.

1 hour ago, emmawoodhouse said:

And they came armed with STATS! I think it was Jill who spit out that molestations happened in something like 2/3 of families. Of course, her source was never cited. 

Yep, that was Jill. And Jessa pulled the, "In Touch is owned by PORN producer!" convinced it was checkmate and everyone would now shut up about the whole thing.

[Zella]

2 minutes ago, lascuba said:

 And Jessa pulled the,  "In Touch is owned by PORN producer!"

Oh hell I forgot about that! 

[emmawoodhouse]

1 hour ago, Zella said:

Oh hell I forgot about that! 

So did I! But it was already known, and not nearly as extreme a connection as Jessa made it out to be. Now that I'm reminded of it, I was waiting for them to play that card; I totally knew it was coming because of the fundie obsession with PORN. 

Edited December 21, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[DangerousMinds]

1 hour ago, Zella said:

Oh hell I forgot about that! 

I wonder if she now realizes that porn and abuse are not similar at all.

[auntieminem]

I don't believe Jill's crying was fake and agree that neither wanted to do the interview but did so for their parents to save the show by down playing what Josh did and he was sorry. This interview was before the Ashley Madison stuff came out. Wonder what the script would have been if they knew that at the time of the interview. I think their responses of crying and cold was because they felt to blame and ashamed and they had to defend their parents and family.  Shame on JB and Michelle for putting them through that. 

[Zella]

11 minutes ago, DangerousMinds said:

I wonder if she now realizes that porn and abuse are not similar at all.

Based on my own fundie encounters, I doubt it. I think I've mentioned on here people I know who think PG-13 sex scenes in movies are porn. Jessa seems one of the least inclined of the siblings to learn anything new and also one of the more combative when challenged, and I don't think anything has convinced her she was wrong about that. 

It also wouldn't surprise me if all of Josh's issues are blamed on porn rather than, you know, Josh.

5 minutes ago, auntieminem said:

Shame on JB and Michelle for putting them through that. 

Agreed! That was ultimately the point I was trying and apparently failing to make earlier when I commented on Jill's and Jessa's comments in the interview. I was not blaming them--I was blaming their parents and the toxic Gothard culture they grew up in that were no doubt the source of those ideas. 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Zella

[emmawoodhouse]

11 minutes ago, DangerousMinds said:

I wonder if she now realizes that porn and abuse are not similar at all.

Doubtful. Jessa's sphere of knowledge is very narrow and has only opened to embrace Ben's Calvinism. 

[Scarlett45]

Moderator Announcement:

Please remember the first #1 Rule at Primetimer is Be Civil. Many of the topics discussed in this forum can bring up strong emotions, lively discussion and disagreement is fine, belittling other posters for their opinions is not. To simplify- statements focused on "I", "I think, I saw, I feel...." are generally fine, statements focused on the opinions of others may not be.

Additionally, this is the Joy & Austin topic, as such posts should focus on them and their family, if you find your response drifting into discussion of other Duggars (and having nothing to do with Joy & Austin), you may quote the poster you are responding to and state "Taking my response to XYZ thread", and reply in the appropriate thread.

[Churchhoney]

On 12/20/2020 at 12:10 AM, awaken said:

Oh yeah duh. She blocked me 🙂 I didn’t say anything inflammatory. 

Well, this is Jessa. Putting her personal business on TeeVee and social media has taken the lion's share of her day, every day, for years and years and years. Yet she once freaked out when somebody asked her, "So what's your husband doing these days?" 

I think she has some kind of disconnect going on when it comes to communicating! 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Churchhoney

[Churchhoney]

On 12/20/2020 at 3:51 AM, GeeGolly said:

I think TLC was between a rock and a hard place after scandal #1 hit. If they cancelled the show they were punishing 4 survivors,

Whereas I'd say that by canceling the show they would have, at last, been doing right by four survivors!

In my opinion, being a "reality tv star" is good for no one. And it's especially not good for people who were introduced into the public media by their parents as children, with no right of consent. As well as even less good for people who already have troubled histories of cult involvement, problematic families that isolate them from the general society, and parent-exacerbated possible traumas that their parents continue to paper over a decade-plus down the line! 😁

Of course, I'm sure it's also true that the question of cancelation's effect on molestation survivors had zero role in TLC's deliberations. I'd be shocked if anybody at the network mentioned it in a single meeting! They cared about one thing: What the hell were they going to do if they had to lose one of their more popular shows forever and ever. 

Luckily for them, the ignorance, laziness and greed of multiple generations of Duggars meant that they didn't need to worry about that. These people wanted to be on TeeVee to get some cash and ego strokes. So in my view no TLC rock and hard place ever materialized!

Edited December 21, 2020 by Churchhoney

[Churchhoney]

18 hours ago, DangerousMinds said:

Agree! Or TLC could actually show the reality of this family, instead of a whitewashed version.

Otherwise known as "The Contract JB Would Never Ever Ever Sign."

You can't advertise Gothardism and super-patriarchal Christianity with the truth. The truth notoriously sets people free. Whereas Gothardites and patriarchs have quite the opposite goal! 

 

 

[GeeGolly]

26 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

Whereas I'd say that by canceling the show they would have, at last, been doing right by four survivors!

In my opinion, being a "reality tv star" is good for no one. And it's especially not good for people who were introduced into the public media by their parents as children, with no right of consent. As well as even less good for people who already have troubled histories of cult involvement, problematic families that isolate them from the general society, and parent-exacerbated possible traumas that their parents continue to paper over a decade-plus down the line! 😁

Of course, I'm sure it's also true that the question of cancelation's effect on molestation survivors had zero role in TLC's deliberations. I'd be shocked if anybody at the network mentioned it in a single meeting! They cared about one thing: What the hell were they going to do if they had to lose one of their more popular shows forever and ever. 

Luckily for them, the ignorance, laziness and greed of multiple generations of Duggars meant that they didn't need to worry about that. These people wanted to be on TeeVee to get some cash and ego strokes. So in my view no TLC rock and hard place ever materialized!

I answer this in the Media thread.

[Churchhoney]

22 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Like I said, I don't really remember the nuances of the interview, but I didn't think they were saying that's a reason to take it lightly. My therapist brain heard more of a message of universality.

When the interview happened, I'd already read accounts of several Gothard alums and most of the Gothard writings on this subject -- in which the Duggars, parent and child, were all steeped. So....that being the case, I heard the opposite of what you heard! And I heard the girls parroting the Gothard "teachings" that they were bombarded with all day every day at the TTH.

Now I don't know how much, if any, of this stuff has been dropped from the ATI/IBLP stuff these days and how much is still read and spoken about today. But the older Duggar kids, at least, were involved in the organizations when the full-on Gothard view of sexual molestation was very much a part of their thinking. 

In Gothard land, molestation, including of infant girls, is something that guys just do. If they're around females, they will both ogle and touch the female parts that attract them sexually. With the upshot being that girls need to understand that it's no big deal; you're no kind of victim when it happens; It's just something that happens naturally and all the time so it shouldn't traumatize you and you have no right to any special consideration or special treatment afterward; that no "help" for molested girls and women is part of the Gothard system since they don't need help; that so far from being sufferers who need therapeutic aid they are in fact very likely to be the initial perpetrators and what they need is education in how to behave themselves so they keep the males from getting too overheated.

The guy has no duties mentioned in Gothard world after he does something like this. He was just behaving according to his nature, which he cannot change -- it's his nature. 

Meanwhile, the girl has numerous duties and she must fulfill them or put her immortal soul in danger. Gothard teachings do say this. What the girl (or the mother on whose watch this happened with an infant girl) must do is immediately forgive and forget the guy's intrusion and then search her own behavior and change anything she can to keep from putting irresistible temptation in front of a male again. 

It definitely sounds sick to most of us. But just because it's sick doesn't mean that the Duggars and company haven't taught it to their children! 

As we know, a therapeutic mindset is absolutely foreign to Gothard world. He came up with his stuff because he is a longtime child molester who created a philosophy and a system for living that totally excuses his own perversions and that makes his sexual grooming of and acting out with the most vulnerable young girls to be nothing harmful to the girls at all -- perhaps helpful in fact, if he's the one doing it! -- and "no big deal" and also not anything he's personally responsible for controlling and certainly nothing the girls would need any therapy or other help for afterward. 

We laugh about the eyetraps thing and "Nike!" But in Gothard land they're no joke at all.

His stuff about this is deadly serious. The view is that guys -- who are also the sole leaders of a Gothard-brand society -- are so sexually hot-wired that all females must follow crazy rules about having lace on your dress etc. if they want to forestall some of the uncontrollable touching their leadership class engages in. 

So having read all that, and knowing that the Duggars, especially the kids who'd been Gothardites since toddlerhood, swam in a world of Gothard "information" and "ideas" -- and kept literally all other ideas out -- this is what I heard in the Jessa/Jill interview! 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Churchhoney

[DangerousMinds]

They must have forgotten about what the Bible says about plucking out their own eyes if they can’t control their lustful feelings.

Edited December 21, 2020 by DangerousMinds

[BigBingerBro]

 

 

Austin Forsyth Wins Court Battle Against Couple Who Sued Him for Fraud Over House Featured on ‘Counting On’; May Still Have to Pay Up When Case Goes to Trial

Edited December 23, 2020 by BigBingerBro

[emmawoodhouse]

It's only temporary, as this case is going to trial. 

[Chicklet]

Yea I'm going to have to vote with the homeowners on this, I think he thinks he's above "petty" local codes. Is he even licensed as a contractor or is he just a house-flipper? 

[emmawoodhouse]

No, he isn't licensed. Just a run of the mill flipper.

[Chicklet]

8 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

No, he isn't licensed. Just a run of the mill flipper.

Well then people should really be wary. Evidently he seems to be like the Duggars "see one, do one, I'm an EXPERT" way of thinking.

Edited December 23, 2020 by Chicklet

[absnow54]

I'm not saying I agree with Austin, because I don't think people who flip houses are ever doing it in the buyer's best interest, rather only their profit margin, but permits are public record. The buyers should have looked up all the permits pulled on the house rather than taking Austin's word. Unfortunately, when you buy a house, you take on all the warts as well. It also looks like seller disclosures on property condition is only encouraged in Arkansas, and not actually required, which again, puts the bulk of due diligence on the buyer when making a purchase.

[GeeGolly]

5 hours ago, absnow54 said:

I'm not saying I agree with Austin, because I don't think people who flip houses are ever doing it in the buyer's best interest, rather only their profit margin, but permits are public record. The buyers should have looked up all the permits pulled on the house rather than taking Austin's word. Unfortunately, when you buy a house, you take on all the warts as well. It also looks like seller disclosures on property condition is only encouraged in Arkansas, and not actually required, which again, puts the bulk of due diligence on the buyer when making a purchase.

I remember reading about the case back when it was filed and it seemed Austin wasn't at fault. To me it looked more like homeowners with buyer's remorse saw what they thought was large pocketbook and decided to sue.

[emmawoodhouse]

4 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I remember reading about the case back when it was filed and it seemed Austin wasn't at fault. To me it looked more like homeowners with buyer's remorse saw what they thought was large pocketbook and decided to sue.

I think nasty sewage is a tad beyond "buyer's remorse." It's a real sanitary issue that costs five figures to remedy.

Edited December 24, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[emma675]

What I never saw was, did the home buyer's get an inspection before buying? I feel like an inspector would have caught that. I'm not sure what the regulations are like in Arkansas but here an inspection is required (and it caught foundation issues in my house that I made the previous owners fix before I agreed to buy).

[emmawoodhouse]

Austin sold the house as-is, so maybe the buyers waived inspection? If so, not very smart.

[emma675]

1 minute ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Austin sold the house as-is, so maybe the buyers waived inspection? If so, not very smart.

So dumb, if they did. I remember watching a Holmes on Homes episode where this woman ended up with a house full of termites, water damage, and asbestos issues because she didn't have an inspection before buying (she claimed she couldn't afford the inspection). Mike Holmes was polite but told her if you can't afford an inspection, you can't afford to own a house and it's so true. And if Austin sold it "as is" and was clear about it, I kind of side with him. It sucks, but home ownership can be a tricky game and it's not for everyone. 

[GeeGolly]

6 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

I think nasty sewage is a tad beyond "buyer's remorse." It's a real sanitary issue that costs five figures to remedy.

I agree, the septic tank issue is a big deal. I don't remember the details, I just remember thinking the buyers didn't have a case against him. Its probably what @emma675 mentioned. No inspection. Its not that I don't feel bad for the homeowners, but you can't hold others responsible for your own mistake. 

[emmawoodhouse]

1 hour ago, GeeGolly said:

I agree, the septic tank issue is a big deal. I don't remember the details, I just remember thinking the buyers didn't have a case against him. Its probably what @emma675 mentioned. No inspection. Its not that I don't feel bad for the homeowners, but you can't hold others responsible for your own mistake. 

Oh, I agree that they should have paid for an inspection ESPECIALLY since they were buying as-is. It sounds like they were trying to cut corners and got burned.