Legal recourse over below market home sale?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As anyone who has completed their 1L property and contract classes will tell you, real estate transactions need to be in writing, and as a general rule of contract law, when there is a written instrument, verbal promises made alongside it are considered null and and void.

As soon as I read OP’s post I immediately thought MYLEGS.

I’m sorry OP, that is shady, but absent a contract there isn’t much your friend can do. The only exception I could think of is if some sort of fraud was involved to create the sale or your friend was too mentally incapacitated to enter into a contract. But that is exceedingly hard to prove.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Verbal contracts or handshake agreements, are legally binding but difficult to prove.
In this case it might not be hard to prove.

Not when it comes to selling a house. The statute of frauds requires that it be in writing. You’re obviously not a lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Why didn't your friend use a realtor? A reputable realtor would have analyzed the market and given him a competitive sales price to list it for. By saving a sales commission, your friend screwed himself. David Ramsay calls this type of ignorant mistake a "stupid tax." Nothing he can do except learn a valuable lesson and not repeat it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Verbal contracts or handshake agreements, are legally binding but difficult to prove.
In this case it might not be hard to prove.

Stop playing lawyer. Go take 1L contracts and come back.

[Anonymous]

OP, I'm sorry this happened to your friend. Like others said, unless it was contractually stipulated that the sale depends on these future plans, there's nothing to be done.

The lesson learned is that business is business. Don't get emotionally involved. We sold 2 homes and went for the best terms every time, including for the only home I've ever felt a strong emotional attachment to. If the new owners turn my beloved prior home into a drug den for misogynistic puppy kickers, then that's no longer any of my business.

[Anonymous]

+1 to talking to a lawyer. This entirely depends on the details of 1) what exactly the buyer promised, 2) how they made the promise, and 3) whether the buyer intended to keep that promise at the time of the sale. It’s unlikely that the seller has a viable contract claim, as others have noted, between the statute of frauds, parol evidence rule, and likely integration clause. There might, though, plausibly be a civil fraud claim if this was egregious intentional duping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As anyone who has completed their 1L property and contract classes will tell you, real estate transactions need to be in writing, and as a general rule of contract law, when there is a written instrument, verbal promises made alongside it are considered null and and void.

As soon as I read OP’s post I immediately thought MYLEGS.

I’m sorry OP, that is shady, but absent a contract there isn’t much your friend can do. The only exception I could think of is if some sort of fraud was involved to create the sale or your friend was too mentally incapacitated to enter into a contract. But that is exceedingly hard to prove.

Agree with this. Your friend should contact a local real estate attorney, but they’ll likely need to prove fraud or incapacitation (there’s another possibility or two), but pp’s are correct that transactions in real estate must be in writing and oral agreements are generally not enforceable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As anyone who has completed their 1L property and contract classes will tell you, real estate transactions need to be in writing, and as a general rule of contract law, when there is a written instrument, verbal promises made alongside it are considered null and and void.

As soon as I read OP’s post I immediately thought MYLEGS.

I’m sorry OP, that is shady, but absent a contract there isn’t much your friend can do. The only exception I could think of is if some sort of fraud was involved to create the sale or your friend was too mentally incapacitated to enter into a contract. But that is exceedingly hard to prove.

Agree with this. Your friend should contact a local real estate attorney, but they’ll likely need to prove fraud or incapacitation (there’s another possibility or two), but pp’s are correct that transactions in real estate must be in writing and oral agreements are generally not enforceable.

Real estate attorney here.

A real estate contract for sale of property definitely has to be in writing which most lawyers here seemed to remember. But what they all forgot was the doctrine of merger. Absent express agreement otherwise the contract ceased fo exist at the time the deed was executed as the contract merged into the underlying fee interest.

The likelihood of recourse here is virtually zero. If your friend is mentally incapacitated or very elderly there might be some chance.

That said, do you know the condition of his house when he sold it. Are you certain it went for $125k below value based on its condition?

[Anonymous]

That difference is immaterial. A Friend sold Rehoboth house 1 year ago for 1.2m. The home was a tear down in great location. The buyer turned around and sold it within 4 weeks for 1.8m to a developer. The developer built a large house and it is selling for 3M+. Located 1 block from beach. Ouch!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As anyone who has completed their 1L property and contract classes will tell you, real estate transactions need to be in writing, and as a general rule of contract law, when there is a written instrument, verbal promises made alongside it are considered null and and void.

This reminds me of 1l. My favorite exception to the statute of frauds was that a signed deposition counted as writing, so if you could get the other party to admit there was an oral contract then you had your written contract. I doubt any practicing lawyer would ever base a case on this, but I remember it popping up on the exam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your friend is stupid. Caveat emptor.

Caveat venditor in this case…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was there an agent involved here? If an agent priced home 140K under market I'd think you could sue them for negligence (their duty of care would be to price at a market rate and to do the research that requires). But if they opted not to use an agent, it's on them.

The ‘market rate’ is whatever price to which the buyer and seller agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was there an agent involved here? If an agent priced home 140K under market I'd think you could sue them for negligence (their duty of care would be to price at a market rate and to do the research that requires). But if they opted not to use an agent, it's on them.

The ‘market rate’ is whatever price to which the buyer and seller agree.

"Market rate" is what a lot of buyers and a lot of sellers agree on.
Not only one seller and one seller.

[Anonymous]

*buyer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was there an agent involved here? If an agent priced home 140K under market I'd think you could sue them for negligence (their duty of care would be to price at a market rate and to do the research that requires). But if they opted not to use an agent, it's on them.

The ‘market rate’ is whatever price to which the buyer and seller agree.

"Market rate" is what a lot of buyers and a lot of sellers agree on.
Not only one seller and one seller.

No, the market rate for the house you're selling is the price you and the buyer agree on. There's not some externally determined market price that trumps the actual sale price.