All Forum Posts by: Tom Gimer

@Alan F. Had 1) an assignment or 2) an entity acquisition been possible rather than a (fat) double-close, this would now be the end buyer's problem. And there would be no unanticipated holding costs... the insured could just let the insurer cure the defect once discovered, if ever.

I'm amazed the title company actually did more title exam work and discovered their recent error in the small gap between the two closings. That's just bad luck... not really something DD would catch.

All I said was that I was following this thread to hear how trying to save a few $ works out. 

@Peter Walther may chime in

Following to hear how skimping on the expenses involved in a true double close works out.

I doubt a hold-open or a binder provides the coverage that will be needed here. And lost “profits”??? lol stop 

I have actually fired clients for trying to close on the A—>B of a double close without title insurance. No, not just for being cheap… for being stupid. 

Always get monetary concessions... never rely upon a seller to do anything after closing, unless you want it done half-assed and on the cheap.

If the lender has not foreclosed or taken a deed in lieu, then the seller is the current owner which is the BK estate. I’ve handled the sale of plenty of properties by BK trustees. if the court believes the price is fair and there are no objections, the court approves the sale. Notice I didn’t suggest that max retail value is the standard. 

You can review the entire case history including actual filings on PACER.gov

If these properties are now REO you need to find the listing agent.

I read the California template... it's got no teeth whatsoever. So to assume a document is going to prevent a distressed seller from staying in a property when they have nowhere else to go is naive. And that's the exact scenario here.

If you search BP you will find many examples supporting the position that an investor should never allow a party facing foreclosure, default, distress to remain in a property after settlement. Over the years I've witnessed parties make many unforced errors in this context. 

I just need a few extra days to get my stuff out. lol

When half of the responses are DON’T EVER and half are GO AHEAD NO PROBLEM that should make an intelligent buyer pause and think about how that could possibly be.

@Jason Phu That's essentially the situation I imagined and trust me, things can go sideways fast. Once you give a seller occupant what they need, the urgency disappears completely. And if their credit is trashed and they fail to qualify for a new place, then what?

It could be a very long time before you obtain possession of that property and getting it could cost you thousand$ in legal fees, damages, etc. Yes, things could also work out perfectly but that's a gamble.

Good luck.

Whenever this comes up I ask the buyer why close now? Why not just extend the settlement date and wait?

Then I share a few rentback horror stories and they usually come to their senses.

best service, fastest turnaround, cheapest

You can only choose 2 of 3.