You should have reviewed the map during due diligence, not at closing. Closing is for checking that the terms of the deal are properly documented not for research.
Well I can tell you the map was not available prior to closing. I requested it and all documents. Town and County governments only referred me to the Metropolitan District, whose board cancelled meetings and ignored all attempts. Closing was the first time I saw anything. That's why I didn't feel bad making them wait.
It's not the seller's fault the county is a pain in the ass. Again closing is not for due diligence. Even if you had found an issue, you would have lost your escrow. I would be pissed too if a buyer tried to find a reason to back out of a deal at closing. That's not what that's for and you could have cost them a ton of money if you had found an issue.
[Edit] fyi the proper way to make the seller care about such things is to extend due diligence and let them know you'll need a flood map before you'll move forward on the deal.
I would be pissed if I bought property that knowingly floods, but the seller's agent insists it is the responsibility of the buyer's agent to discover this.
I don't "think" it's the buyer's responsibility. It literally is their responsibility (excluding special circumstances). The large majority of contracts are written with the assumption that the buyer performs due diligence during a specific period. Once that period is up, there are penalties for backing out. The buyer is in violation of the contract if they back out of the offer. Rights have little to do with contract law in this case by the way.
Note we're talking about public records such as flood plains here, not the seller lying on a disclosure form or some other form of fraud.
My point is that any experienced seller (and the lawyers and agents and banks...) is going to be confused and likely pissed if you show up to closing expecting to do all your research then. That's not what closing is for. Due diligence exists for a reason.
>> is going to be confused and likely pissed if you show up to closing expecting to do all your research then.
To be clear, the seller in this case also happened to be the developer in charge of the quasi-government entity responsible for these documents. The county referred me to them because State law gives them responsibility for those documents. They had violated time frames in the contract multiple times before this, I only proceeded because I wanted the house at that location and wasn't willing to walk away despite their violations.
I gave the title insurance company and the seller written notice of several weeks that I was still waiting on documents, and that if I didn't have them until we closed, I was going to make them sit there while I looked it all over. So I really don't care if they were confused or pissed, and I really don't care if you think so, either. I asked for them early in the process, didn't get them, so I was going to look them over and make a final decision when I got them - which was at closing, because they chose it to be at closing. I had money already on the table, and it was a calculated risk that I would eventually be okay with the documents, but I wasn't prepared to proceed with the rest of the mortgage without them.
My point is that it was obvious to me that in most of the mortgages they handled and in most of the contracts this developer / builder (one of the biggest in my area) handles, most people were not looking at these things EVER.
