All Forum Posts by: Bradley N.

I realize that but I explained that in my original post. I didn't have a problem with the increase per se but the way I had to actively pursue information about the process along the way makes me think about the entire experience in retrospect. It was like taking candy from a baby. Only this baby didn't want to give up the candy. And, you never answered the question so that I can at least know what is right and wrong in the future. Your blaming the consumer for not asking questions that they might not know to ask? Oh, and I see you are a real estate agent.

Thank You for your input.

I just purchased some real estate. When I made my first offer, the person helping me said the seller needed X amount of dollars for EMD. The seller responded with a counter-offer and we finally came to an agreement on the sale price. The real estate agent submitted my counter-offer for the price I offered but without telling me that it was contingent upon an increase in the EMD amount. When I finally got the approved paperwork back is when I discovered the increase in the EMD amount by a factor of 4. When the agent verbally told me my offer had been accepted the agent never mentioned that it was contingent upon increasing the earnest money amount. At the time, I didn't give the increase much thought because I knew I wanted to buy the real estate. And I've done so.

However, in retrospect, I got small red flags with this real estate agent all along the process. Almost like the person wanted to keep me in the dark about things as much as possible. Case in point, is telling me my counter-offer was approved but letting ME discover that the EMD money had increased by a factor of 4 when the agent sent me the paperwork.

I have absolutely no qualms about a request for quadrupling EMD if it's a legitimate request from the seller, I would be very upset to think that the real estate agent did that on their own to make me think twice about backing out of the deal or to even entice the seller to accept the counter-offer to begin with. The final settlement shows a nice commission for the agent, which again I have no problem with in and of itself. But I have an extreme problem with deception and being taken advantage of.

So, my question is: Would it be illegal for a real estate agent to make a counter-offer on my behalf but increase the EMD deposit amount in the counter-offer, without my knowledge, above and beyond what the seller is asking to entice the seller to accept the counter-offer and for the agent to feel more secure that the transaction will be successfully completed and that they would definitely get their commission?

They're not my fears. I'm the seller. My concern was why the buyer's title insurance company has such fears about a debt that should have been eliminated in a foreclosure. It seems the buyer's title company doesn't have any faith in laws.

I purchased a piece of property from a bank that got title through a foreclosure via the first mortgage lien. There was a medical lien put on the property (vacant land now) 2 years prior to the bank foreclosure. My understanding is that the only liens that survive a foreclosure are tax liens. This is a medical bill lien put on by a state agency. I've been assured by my title insurer that the tax lien doesn't follow the property owner. But a new title insurance company which I'm selling the property through is scared it might still be valid. Why is there such uncertainty that the lien has been extinguished, via the foreclosure, since there was a superior first mortgage on the property?

When you use the word appraisal are you referring to a general home inspectors reports or are you talking about an actual home value appraisal done by a real estate appraisal company/agent?

All I am having done so far is a termite inspection by a general home inspector to determine 1)whether its a "live" infestation and 2)estimated total damage and repair cost from termites. So, all I will really have is a termite inspection report from a general home inspector.

I am under contract to purchase a HUD property soon. A general home inspector seen termite damage under the front porch. He will be coming back soon to do a more thorough inspection. What's the banks position on this issue?

I have been told by a termite inspector that laws are changing and that banks demand treatment every 5 years on properties with known termite issues. Is that true? If this is, in fact true, how would I even know when the last termite treatment was done on this property? The termite treatment estimate was $395.00 but the exterminator admitted to not even knowing if there is a live infestation.

Also, what is the minimum termite grounds that HUD will allow you to cancel a contract on if necessary with regard to termites. Do they require confirmation that a live infestation is present, is documentation of termite damage by an exterminator specialist sufficient? Is evidence of prior termite treatments on the property enough to cancel a HUD contract? And will HUD accept live infestation and damage confirmation from an exterminator company estimate or does it have to be from a general home inspector?

Just want to be in the "know" given the current situation I find myself in.

Thanks for reading.

I didn't mean to offend anybody honestly. But I do believe that the in-built system of being rewarded only when you sale homes can lead to, at least a few, very pushy and dishonest agents. I guess this comes down to more a human behavior discussion which is beyond what I really wanted to get into.

Maybe I am just lucky but some of the agents I have been involved with have said some pretty crazy things to make sales. One I'll never forget. "Buy this home today for 80K. If you don't like I'll sell it for you in 2 or 3 years for 110K". After that comment, I asked if we could tear up the real estate contract I had signed on agent exclusivity. And he did the right thing. He tore it up.

I am paraphrasing the figures above but it was very much so along those lines of thought.

It does sound like you are downplaying the seriousness of termite issues also. In your state they may not be a problem. But I have read horror stories about termites. They can be financially devastating. So I am thankful at least somebody is watching out for new home buyers for these very issues.

Actually, there have been several red flags with this agent. But I guess, sometimes, you don't place much value in the agents themselves. I learned a few years ago to do as much research about everything on my own, versus taking anything an agent says at their word. Its hard to know sometimes when to cut ties and I didn't do it soon enough.

The agent has been very pushy with the sale and I understand they want to make money like anybody. I just wish there was a better system, where they got paid a different way. But it is what it is.

I don't know that this agent would go so far as to not honor my request. But what if an agent does? I guess like you suggested, I would simply have to tell my story to the licensing commission.

I am under contract to buy a HUD home as an O/O. I had an inspector meet me at the property and he believes I have a termite issue. I am having a termite inspector out next week to confirm and give a repair estimate. But I am under a deadline. I only have a few days to get the termite inspection report and get it back to HUD people.

What worries me is the deadline. And the fact that, even though buyer agents are supposed to be protecting you, they seem not really to care anything about the home buyer, other than the sale being completed so that they get paid.

I've alerted my agent to the possible termite infestation issue and all the agent replied with was that the termite issue can be fixed.  I might have responded, "at what cost and how do you know it's fixed for sure". But I simply let her know my opinion that a treatment does not guarantee a resolution to the problem.

So, I have to seriously consider cancelling my contract once this is verified by the proper people.

So back to the original question. If my broker dawdles around long enough because he/she doesn't want the contract cancelled for termite infestation(or any other reason) and doesn't get the signed form back in time, because honestly, what good is that for the buyer agent, what happens then?

It seems so backward to require the signature of the broker in this type of situation. You put the broker in the awkward position of cutting their own throat, so to speak. Does anybody think differently than I do?