Protection Against Flaky Buyers

[Anonymous]

AgentX wrote:Because that's how it works PP. Once you are made aware of an issue by an Inspector, you have to disclose it. If you don't and it comes to light that you knew about it as the seller, you could find yourself in court and it won't go in your favor.

Agent X. Please, again, talk to your broker tomorrow. You are spewing inaccuracies and not helping anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

AgentX wrote:Because that's how it works PP. Once you are made aware of an issue by an Inspector, you have to disclose it. If you don't and it comes to light that you knew about it as the seller, you could find yourself in court and it won't go in your favor.

Agent X. Please, again, talk to your broker tomorrow. You are spewing inaccuracies and not helping anyone.

Not pp and a lawyer, the statement is correct in Maryland.

[Anonymous]

If you have copies of the new inspection reports, talk to your realtor. Is there anything there that you did not initially disclose that you now need to? For example - I lived in a 1900s house. I could assume that I had lead paint. I am not a paint expert and never had my house checked so for disclosure I said that I did not know.

Also - what state are you in? Each state has different sales processes and understanding the nuances may be important for you and the advice you are getting.

[Anonymous]

If it's an consolation I have a condo that had 5 offers. We ratified with 3 of them only to have all 3 back out for no real reason. By then the other 2 moved on. Fortunately we put it back on and got 3 more offers and ratified for $15k more than our previous best.

So, it could work out well. What is up with so many flaky buyers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AgentX wrote:Because that's how it works PP. Once you are made aware of an issue by an Inspector, you have to disclose it. If you don't and it comes to light that you knew about it as the seller, you could find yourself in court and it won't go in your favor.

Agent X. Please, again, talk to your broker tomorrow. You are spewing inaccuracies and not helping anyone.

Not pp and a lawyer, the statement is correct in Maryland.

Both of you check who has the burden to disclose

[Steve]

I'm a big proponent of buyers and sellers getting on the same page prior to ratification.

[Anonymous]

AgentX wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AgentX wrote:Because that's how it works PP. Once you are made aware of an issue by an Inspector, you have to disclose it. If you don't and it comes to light that you knew about it as the seller, you could find yourself in court and it won't go in your favor.

Agent X. Please, again, talk to your broker tomorrow. You are spewing inaccuracies and not helping anyone.

Oh other agent...you're so so wrong. I'm unsure how you are so misinformed and incompetent. The OP stated they have the reports. Now they have to disclose. You need to check with your broker and with good old Google. If you and/or your client receive the reports and you don't now update your disclosures you will find yourself in a heap of trouble. But why don't you try it out and let us know how it goes when you are in receipt of an inspection report and it's found that there was an issue raised by an inspector during inspection of the house and you didn't disclose it.

Allow me to start with this to help you be a better agent! http://realtormag.realtor.org/law-and-ethics/law/article/2009/04/10-essential-disclosure-rules

And, it's been the case for quite some time: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/16/AR2005091600883.html

Regarding inspections prior to contract, the only time they are done is when there are multiple offers on a hotly pursued property and the buyers want to not have inspection as part of their offer so it's more attractive to the seller. OP's property has been sitting on the market, why allow such nonsense? Get people to sign on the line, then let them in to inspect.

Did you read OPs original post saying she had received two of the previous inspections and they "came back clean." What is she failing to disclose? That she had two clean inspections? Your comments may apply if there were items on the report that the seller knew of and would then havre to disclose. You were advising IP generally not specific ally to her situation.

[Anonymous]

OP - You don't have a contract so accepting the offer doesn't matter until it's in writing. It also doesn't matter how much EMD they put down until you have a written contract because EMD is not at risk until they sign a contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you sure the inspection reports are coming back fine? They may be uncovering something, and the buyers' agents know that if they tell you, you'll have to disclose.

I backed out of an offer a few years ago because the inspection just uncovered so, so many issues. I had thought the price was already on the high side, and then when the inspection showed so much potentially expensive stuff, I didn't think I had the money and energy to deal with it.

In order to void a contract, the notice must include the home inspection report. OP should have received the report and known any issues

No b/c let don't have a signed contract so no need to send contingency.

We have walked after inspection b/c we get a closer look and realize things like a '4th' bedroom in listing isn't legal b/c the basement window is too small. Is there something in your listing potentially misrepresented or a busy road nearby that they will notice noise during longer inspection window?

But fundamentally market is telling you that you priced too high.

Could you clarify your first sentence? After you sober up, of course.

PP here, I wish I was drinking. Not sure why the snark? B/c we are annoyed at sellers lying in their listings?

Anyways, these were verbal offers, no contract was in place, so buyers performed an inspection, and then went silent. There was no inspection contingency to execute to execute (no contract just verbal offer) and no need to send seller the inspection report.

I still say there is probably something about the property which is off, which closer inspection spooks the buyers.

Price is always the best fix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

AgentX wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AgentX wrote:Because that's how it works PP. Once you are made aware of an issue by an Inspector, you have to disclose it. If you don't and it comes to light that you knew about it as the seller, you could find yourself in court and it won't go in your favor.

Agent X. Please, again, talk to your broker tomorrow. You are spewing inaccuracies and not helping anyone.

Oh other agent...you're so so wrong. I'm unsure how you are so misinformed and incompetent. The OP stated they have the reports. Now they have to disclose. You need to check with your broker and with good old Google. If you and/or your client receive the reports and you don't now update your disclosures you will find yourself in a heap of trouble. But why don't you try it out and let us know how it goes when you are in receipt of an inspection report and it's found that there was an issue raised by an inspector during inspection of the house and you didn't disclose it.

Allow me to start with this to help you be a better agent! http://realtormag.realtor.org/law-and-ethics/law/article/2009/04/10-essential-disclosure-rules

And, it's been the case for quite some time: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/16/AR2005091600883.html

Regarding inspections prior to contract, the only time they are done is when there are multiple offers on a hotly pursued property and the buyers want to not have inspection as part of their offer so it's more attractive to the seller. OP's property has been sitting on the market, why allow such nonsense? Get people to sign on the line, then let them in to inspect.

Did you read OPs original post saying she had received two of the previous inspections and they "came back clean." What is she failing to disclose? That she had two clean inspections? Your comments may apply if there were items on the report that the seller knew of and would then havre to disclose. You were advising IP generally not specific ally to her situation.

Different insepctors have different skills, so other inspectors might have noticed something. And "clean" is suspicious; there is always something to be found, even just the age of appliances. So nothing drastic but maybe more work than expected.

[Anonymous]

There's no such thing as a "clean" inspection. I bet they're finding stuff.

Your house has been on the market for SO LONG that they're going into it trying to figure out what's wrong with it. And they're finding something, apparently.

[Anonymous]

To the 2nd agent - doesn't matter if they are clean or not. You would protect your seller as the listing agent by not allowing an inspection to happen to begin with unless there is a ratified contract. If not, you are failing at protecting your client from potential further disclosures.

1st agent is 100% correct. You sound like you need some additional training.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it's an consolation I have a condo that had 5 offers. We ratified with 3 of them only to have all 3 back out for no real reason. By then the other 2 moved on. Fortunately we put it back on and got 3 more offers and ratified for $15k more than our previous best.

So, it could work out well. What is up with so many flaky buyers?[/quote]

In California real estate, agents protect against flaky buyers by:

(1) requiring an earnest money deposit of 20-25% on any contract;

(2) allowing only a five-day window for inspection and release of all contingencies;

(3) contractually scheduling the closing no more than twenty days after the offer is accepted;

(4) requesting that the 20-25% deposit be transferred from escrow to the seller upon the release of all contingencies;

(5) accepting offers with no financing and inspection contingencies; or preferably

(6) accepting only all-cash offers.

If local realtors are indeed seeing an increased issue of "flaky buyers", it is time to start to demand some or all of the above terms in any offer you consider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's an consolation I have a condo that had 5 offers. We ratified with 3 of them only to have all 3 back out for no real reason. By then the other 2 moved on. Fortunately we put it back on and got 3 more offers and ratified for $15k more than our previous best.

So, it could work out well. What is up with so many flaky buyers?[/quote]

In California real estate, agents protect against flaky buyers by:

(1) requiring an earnest money deposit of 20-25% on any contract;

(2) allowing only a five-day window for inspection and release of all contingencies;

(3) contractually scheduling the closing no more than twenty days after the offer is accepted;

(4) requesting that the 20-25% deposit be transferred from escrow to the seller upon the release of all contingencies;

(5) accepting offers with no financing and inspection contingencies; or preferably

(6) accepting only all-cash offers.

If local realtors are indeed seeing an increased issue of "flaky buyers", it is time to start to demand some or all of the above terms in any offer you consider.

Haha, talk to us after the tech and real estate bubble pops and we will see the terms you demand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's an consolation I have a condo that had 5 offers. We ratified with 3 of them only to have all 3 back out for no real reason. By then the other 2 moved on. Fortunately we put it back on and got 3 more offers and ratified for $15k more than our previous best.

So, it could work out well. What is up with so many flaky buyers?[/quote]

In California real estate, agents protect against flaky buyers by:

(1) requiring an earnest money deposit of 20-25% on any contract;

(2) allowing only a five-day window for inspection and release of all contingencies;

(3) contractually scheduling the closing no more than twenty days after the offer is accepted;

(4) requesting that the 20-25% deposit be transferred from escrow to the seller upon the release of all contingencies;

(5) accepting offers with no financing and inspection contingencies; or preferably

(6) accepting only all-cash offers.

If local realtors are indeed seeing an increased issue of "flaky buyers", it is time to start to demand some or all of the above terms in any offer you consider.

Haha, talk to us after the tech and real estate bubble pops and we will see the terms you demand

Well these terms work very effectively now in the California market, and they weed out the flaky buyers.