HOW TO SWAY BROKER TO USE A SPECIFIC DOUBLE CLOSE TITLE COMPANY?

[Burt L.]

I believe I"m finishing up negotiations on the A side of a large wholesale deal and the sticking point seems to be the choice of title company. 

Property is a multi-family that I will then split into different units for the B side buyer, as done a dozen times before. We've only done one bigger, but this is also a seven figure purchase price. I go thin on my fees on MLS deals so as not to alienate buyers on future deals.

Its a Colorado standard contract, and our contract states that whoever pays for the title insurance selects the title company, and I wrote that I would pay the title insurance and closing costs at the title company I specified, in the offer Also in their counter is that they want the tenants to get 60 days notice instead of 30 days and the broker will get the full commission, neither of which is bothersome.

But if I use his title company and his closer, they will balk at my double closing. I have double closed with two other escrow officers at their title company, but not this particular escrow agent and the brokers history shows he's closed 60 transactions in the last 2.5 years. Broker has worked with this title officer a total of twenty years or so and is insistent, and has countered back with their title company and the sixty days for the tenants, and that the broker gets the full commission as mentioned (I dont use a buyers broker so my offers are more workable, of course).

I could counter back agreeing to all but the change in title company. I could give the broker another .5 or 1% broker fee. I could agree to their title company, but to use one of the agents I am familiar with there - though that company was clumsy each time and some wrong things were said and this is delicate. But this all raises the question of why I am so insistent on this first title company, and why would I pay more to do so? Conversely, why is the broker so insistent on his title company, if the seller will now have to pay for a 3K title policy. Not sure why the broker would advise the seller pay that. It seems there must be other perks the broker gets for using this company. And if there is a theoretical claim concerning title insurance, I'm the one who needs the insurance and not the seller and I have to use a company I didn't choose - though I wont be around for long.

This was the first time I had used an escalation clause, and I know the two offers closest behind me had buyer brokers, so the broker would really prefer to use mine as he gets both sides of the commission, but is sticking on the title co issue, and goes on about how good his closer is.

The deal has plenty of room in it, but if I have to go to transactional funding, it will cost a great deal for one day and monies will have to be wired from that hard money lender, which isn't in my contract and the "home-field" closer may share that detail which is probably more important than the transactional cost though that cost is certainly substantial. Using their title company also presents risks for my buyer in his part of the process. 

What might be good reasons for a buyer to explain using the title company of their choice, instead of what the broker is comfortable with? These big deals just shorten my lifespan a little more - 1/2 lol...