Marchant Real Estate illegally sold 2 homes with lead paint risks.

In South Carolina, homes built before 1978 carry a hidden risk: lead-based paint that can poison children and contaminate communities. Yet according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Marchant Real Estate, Inc., a prominent Greenville brokerage, failed to disclose these dangers to buyers… and this happened twice! The evil company violated federal lead-safety disclosure laws designed to protect families from one of the most pervasive environmental toxins in U.S. housing.
The price of that negligence? A dinky ass $1,300 penalty.

A Pattern of Negligence

• EPA Investigation: On June 4, 2024, EPA inspectors arrived at Marchant Real Estate’s Greenville office to review compliance with federal lead disclosure rules under 40 C.F.R. Part 745, Subpart F. A copy of which can be found by those with access to an internet search engine.
• Incomplete Records: The company provided contracts for two pre-1978 homes. 8 Lindberg Avenue (built 1950) and 107 Elm Street (built 1945), these were sold in 2025 and 2022 respectively.
• Missing Disclosures: The EPA found the firm failed to include required lead hazard warnings, buyer acknowledgments, and agent certification statements in those contracts.
• Violation of Federal Law: These omissions violated our Toxic Substances Control Act’s implementing regulations, which mandate that agents inform sellers of their obligations and ensure buyers receive hazard information.
• Settlement Without Admission: Marchant Real Estate agreed to the EPA’s consent order but neither admitted nor denied the allegations, consenting to pay a civil penalty of $1,300.

The Macro Consequences

The Public Health Crisis

Lead exposure remains one of the most devastating and preventable environmental health threats. By failing to provide mandatory disclosures, Marchant Real Estate effectively stripped buyers of their right to know if a property could endanger their children.
Lead dust from aging paint can cause irreversible brain damage, learning disabilities, and behavioral disorders, especially in children under six. The homes in question- built in the 1940s and 1950s- fall squarely within the high-risk category targeted by federal disclosure laws.

The Erosion of Trust

This case exposes a larger systemic issue: federal safeguards are only as strong as their enforcement. The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X) requires that every agent, not just sellers, ensure disclosure compliance. Yet with penalties as low as $1,300, the cost of noncompliance is trivial; less than a single realtor’s commission on one home sale.
The result: widespread underreporting, weak deterrence, and a housing market where compliance is optional until inspectors show up.

The Economic Fallout

Beyond public health, violations like this distort market trust. Buyers may unknowingly invest in contaminated homes that require costly remediation. When hidden hazards emerge, property values can plummet; while the agents who skirted the law face little consequence.

The Systemic Failure

Marchant Real Estate’s violations weren’t unique; they represent a recurring pattern in the real estate industry where agents prioritize sales velocity over safety. EPA’s Region 4 has pursued similar cases in multiple states, highlighting a chronic enforcement gap between the law’s intent and its impact.

The Bottom Line: Accountability Deferred

The EPA’s enforcement action concludes neatly on paper: Marchant Real Estate pays $1,300 and waives appeal rights. Yet the underlying system remains unchanged.

• No admission of guilt.
• No public notice to affected homebuyers.
• No industry-wide corrective mechanism.

This case is a microcosm of regulatory fatigue. What does this mean, you ask? Well when compliance is reduced to a cost of doing business, the public pays the real price—in lead exposure, lost trust, and diminished accountability.

Relevant enforcement information can be found here the UNITED STATES EPA WEBSITE