All Forum Posts by: John Barrows

I'm still suspect of the agent involved. A breached contract is basically a litigious moment in time. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE in every agreement.

I can't and wouldn't tell you want to do because that would draw me into the possible outcome.Look at the facts of your agreement. Seems like there is a willing seller, a willing buyer that came to terms with no issues until the AGENT is involved. Now, with that said, I'm going to be candid here, "If I were the Designated Broker" I would be scrambling to see what my AGENT did at the last minute to make this deal fall apart?

I might suspect the broker or coordinator that reviews the agreements, may have CAUGHT THE FACT that NO COMMISSION was in the deal and told the agent to get THEIR COMMISSION into the deal (speculation here). If that were the case, agent may have gone to the seller and told seller MY BROKER WANTS TO GET PAID THEIR COMMISSION. Seller says BS,I'm not paying a commission or never disclosed the commission up front in the agreement.

Again, I am only speculating on this but, I would certainly go after the deal and MAYBE the RE BROKERAGE may have to pay the amount because of what the agent may have said or done. It seems like (without looking at the contract) and only hearing one side of the agreement, you may have a case to pursue. I would certainly talk to a (RE contracts) attorney and see if it's worthy enough to pursue. If you sue, you'll want to make sure ALL PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT ARE SERVED and SUED! Don't let the broker escape.

Last, if it were a simple error in contract or agreement, I would talk to the agents broker but, since the contract is a breach, there isn't much the broker will do to revive a deal that the broker would be getting zero commission or possibly sued. You can try talking to the agent broker (they don't really want to be sued) but, WRITE EVERYTHING DOWN or RECORD THE INFORMATION. COURTS DO NOT rely on hearsay! Good Luck

Golly, I almost threw up my cookies just reading this post. Everything is wrong about this post!

1. Where is your broker? As a Managing Broker and If I see this I will fire you or send your license back to the state. I see NONE of this is approved by your broker. WOW....I believe in most states this would be considered false and misleading advertising.

2. Giving the seller an OPEN LISTING is stating you're willing to work for free or your services are worthless.

I have nothing else to say, makes me shake my head in disbelief...... 

Sounds like you got a great deal on a fix & flip! Congratulations!

When dealing with subs, you need to be the GENERAL CONTRACTOR and should have a CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE for each project that the SUB SEE's on a daily basis. It's OK to pay someone hourly but, YOU are responsible for the schedule and quality of work if you do this sort of agreement.

You can get a eraser board or use a spreadsheet. You should have let the sub know, this is where you start and this is what I expect. Anything other then that is not acceptable. Remember, a hourly sub can be replaced quickly and a new one installed. Even if you have to get someone to work with the sub on your behalf, do that. Many subs have to be closely supervised and directed on a daily basis. Good luck with your next project.

Prior to removing the inspection contingency, the HOA delivers to buyers a copy of the CCR's, A Budget, Copy of minute's by the board, Rules & Regulations and any assessments that will have to be paid at closing, along with the current monthly HOA DUES. As a Broker representing the client, these items have to be delivered in order to fulfill the inspection contingency.

What if the Condo HOA will be replacing the roof and an assessment of $10K for each unit, will be assessed? Same with the monthly HOA DUES. What if the HOA knew the HOA DUES were being raised and made false misleading statements. The HOA, they have to rightfully disclose this information to the new buyer by law. If a buyer see's these items and says NO, I will not pay these items then can REJECT THE INSPECTION and cancel the P&SA.

Sounds like the buyer didn't have any of these items met do to the fact the HOA may not have disclosed the correct HOA amount during the inspection period. That's a real problem going forward.

I think you'll find, if you DID NOT fill out Seller Property Disclosure form or a give the buyer a DISCLOSURE FORM 17 (Seller Disclosure to buyer) it may fall under a law suit if things do appear.

It's been PROVEN on many occasions in Washington State Law that an item, a work defect or a material defect would be "AS IS" but, the whole property that is supposed to be LIVABLE and not CONTAMINATED is not an "AS IS" definition. If the buyer accepts the property (as is) with prior written knowledge by (seller disclosure) then that could constitute an (AS IS) scenario. In Washington State that has been rebuked a number of times, so look at your state laws. 

Sounds like the agent never disclosed and sounds to me like the escrow company never got a copy of the original agreement.

Two separate issues here.

1. Why did you wait so long to give a copy of your agreement to the escrow company? The Title company has nothing to do with escrow. Plus, the agent doesn't EVER represent you in any manner. The agent represents the seller.

2. When the agent came to you about the change, that should have been your clue that something was wrong and you should have reacted for your own recourse. Now, with the new VERBAL agreements being thrown around, that should have been RED FLAG # 2. You should have received a new agreement signed off by both parties. Doesn't sound like you did.

3. Most all states have a (BUYER BEWARE) law. This law openly states, that all buyers acting for themselves or even being represented, MUST BEWARE OF BAD and ILLEGAL PRACTICES. Washington State is a BUYER BEWARE STATE! 

If you haven't closed yet, my suspicions suggest the agent wants their commission and never thought this through. The final step for the agent was to tell the seller she owed a commission (OUT OF SELLER POCKET) and the seller said BS, get the money from the buyer... This sounds more plausible.

If a mortgage is owed to a bank, mortgagor or a mortgage servicing company from the present owner/seller and the owner/seller tries to do a "seller Financing" deal, when the TITLE changes hands the (DUE IN SALE) clause to the mortgage company is triggered. Once that happens, the mortgage company can (CALL THE LOAN) due and payable NOW!

There's no such thing as a (secret title recording) or anything as dumb as that in law. Once the title changes hands it invokes the DUE IN SALE CLAUSE. Understand this, Banks, mortgage companies, servicing companies ALL RUN TITLE SEARCHES ONCE A YEAR and if the title changes hands YOU WILL BE NOTIFIED!

I paid off my mortgage at the bank and got title and the bank was frantic that I did that. They even went as far as reported the payoff to the IRS. SO YEAH, be aware you won't be getting anything over on a bank. In the short term (a few months) maybe but, not for the long term.

IF you own the property outright then that's a very good way to create passive income and boost your buying power. You have someone else on title, you have a steady income, you have a TON of EQUITY, you have no maintenance costs, you've extended any tax liability and you still have an interest in the subject property, banks love that! WHY? Because if you fail to pay and they foreclose they will go after the property with all the equity. 

I don't know of any laws that prohibit anyone from buying real estate without a broker. I'm a broker and I buy my own property. I have friends who buy auction and foreclosed properties without a broker so, yes, you can buy property that's in foreclosure without a broker.... people do it everyday......

Good call Bill! I was going to say the same thing! They can also set up the escrow now, so to only use one account to put the non-refundable EM in rather then having two accounts. Just keep up on the paperwork and time elements in the deal! 

WHAT? So, how does the buyer have access to the title as you say? "The previous investor that the seller previously signed a purchase agreement with currently has rights to the title". 

NOBODY has rights to a property (title) accept the seller, unless the seller signed off the title and put that person on the title...... and recorded it! 

Also, if the sellers property has a MORTGAGE on the house, the seller only has possession rights to the title. The new buyer would have to be  approved by the original mortgage company and be put on the loan that manner, rather then just being added to any title. So, with that said, by adding someone else to the title would make the original loan (DUE ON DEMAND) once this is found out by the bank or mortgage company that made the original loan.

Read the original loan agreement if the seller has a loan on the house. Every bank has a DUE ON SALE CLAUSE (demand payment) once the title changes without their approval! Read the paperwork.