Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. Cancel anytime.
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Buying & Selling Real Estate
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated over 2 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

19
Posts
1
Votes
Shahid Iqbal
  • Real Estate Investor
  • Plano, TX
1
Votes |
19
Posts

Considering filing for 'Specific Performance' - Seller backs away

Shahid Iqbal
  • Real Estate Investor
  • Plano, TX
Posted

Hi Pros,

I can use your guidance here.

I have scenario where buyer signed a contract to purchase a piece of land here in Texas held by a trust. Contract is using standard 'TREC Unimproved Property Contract' with seller responsible to provide survey and pay for title / commitment. There were two installments of earnest money that were both paid by the buyer on-time. As closing date  (originally May 2) approached, seller was not providing original trust that was required by title company to issue the title commitment. Before closing, survey was performed (paid by buyer; but seller is responsible for the cost) and it identified that there was encroachment by neighbor. Buyer raised the objection for boundary issue to be resolved a day before closing date; so per contract language, closing date gets extended for 14 days for seller to cure the objection. In first week of May, seller provided the title company original trust and agrees to extend the closing date to May 15. Even though there was objection on boundary issue, buyer is open to idea of closing on property as long as title commitment can be issued with exception. Title company responded that it's not able to get anyone to issue title commitment and returned the earnest money to buyer. So that is where things are now.

Buyer is still interested to close the property and asking seller to take contract to different title company and execute. Buyer has incurred about $5000 (survey and other due diligence related cost). Now seller is not cooperating or responding to any of buyer attempt and kind of walking away from the contract.

Buyer is considering to file for 'specific performance' so seller complies with contract. Is this a case that typically good chance for buyer to:

A. Force the sale of the property.    AND/OR

B. Force seller to pay for the monetary damages / expenses incurred by buyer and any related attorney charges for covering 'specific performance' case.

Many thanks.

Most Popular Reply

User Stats

4,335
Posts
4,241
Votes
Greg H.
Pro Member
  • Broker/Flipper
  • Austin, TX
4,241
Votes |
4,335
Posts
Greg H.
Pro Member
  • Broker/Flipper
  • Austin, TX
ModeratorReplied

So for the earnest money to be refunded, the contract was terminated and an earnest money release was signed by both parties.  As of that point, there is no contract for one to enforce the seller to perform

The seller has no further obligation to sell the property under the original terms or execute a new contract and take it to another title company

The buyer can always pursue damages for the cost of the survey in small claims.  The wording of the original agreement would determine the outcome

  • Greg H.
  • Loading replies...