Land purchase contract/owner carry now trying to evict based on rental...

[ADBunting]

What is the name of your state? Nevada

It's my understanding that in a valid business contract you must absolutely understand and both agree to the same conditions.

Firstly there have been some serious breachs by the seller. Not satisfying a lien, no mediation via the local RE Board, etc. There are also numerous minor breachs in the contract. I only found out about all of this when he had me served with an unlawful detainer.

From what I remember either all is valid or all is voidable. It would seem that you can't suddenly decide 14 months into the contract just to try to scam someone out of their down payment. His Corporation, that is the listed 'owner' also doesn't have a business license for our county.

I need information about void/voidable contracts. I had a license many years ago under my mother, who was a broker in So. California for many decades which is where I have a basic foundation for my questions. (realizing of course that it's in Nevada and many years later)

Any input or links to read the legalities on business contracts would be great.

Sue

[lcannister]

Seems any good search engine would bring you up a myriad of info on this topic.

Perhaps it is time for you to consult an Atty versed in real estate.

[FlyingRon]

I can't understand any of what you are trying to say. Your subject isn't complete enough.
Your understanding of contract law is incorrect for sure. A lawyer would help.

[ADBunting]

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

I can't understand any of what you are trying to say. Your subject isn't complete enough.
Your understanding of contract law is incorrect for sure. A lawyer would help.

I have an owner carry/land purchase contract for 2 years. 14 months into the contract the seller suddenly has decided he is going to try to evict my daughter and myself based on Tenant/Landlord law.

Suppose someone wanted to buy an apple, the seller said it would be an apple, they both agreed it would be an apple and the seller decided to give them a banana?

Same idea only very simply put.

I do remember about contract law that both parties DO have to understand the specifics or it's a voidable contract. That's what I need to know or find links to.

He wants the property back, I want out BUT he doesn't want to give my $26k down payment back OR give me clear title to be able to re-sell.

I need a link to search codes about contracts in this instance.

Seriously though, would YOU sign a contract that was vague? Or would you sign a contract that had 2 different copies containing different information? One for you to follow and one for the seller to follow? (to their advantage)

Sue

[FlyingRon]

Originally Posted by ADBunting

I have an owner carry/land purchase contract for 2 years. 14 months into the contract the seller suddenly has decided he is going to try to evict my daughter and myself based on Tenant/Landlord law.

Is this a written installment sale contract? Or a lease with option to buy? Have you fully complied with on-time payments and the other conditions of the contract? If your ducks are in a row, then it should be straightforward to answer the complaint.

Suppose someone wanted to buy an apple, the seller said it would be an apple, they both agreed it would be an apple and the seller decided to give them a banana?

Same idea only very simply put.

Your analogies are spurious. You've already made a conclusion and are making bizarre statements to try to substantiate. What the people who are hear need to know are the exact, calmly stated facts:

1. What exact written contract do you have?
2. Have you fully complied with your side of the contract?
3. What action has he taken to try to evict you?

I do remember about contract law that both parties DO have to understand the specifics or it's a voidable contract. That's what I need to know or find links to.

You can hunt around for links to that, but there is no such principal in contract law. And real estate transactions are required to be in writing (and in most places with the option of recision in light of legal review) to that you will have understood it (the fact that you didn't read it or didn't understand what you signed isn't a defense unless you want to plead incompetency).

He wants the property back, I want out BUT he doesn't want to give my $26k down payment back OR give me clear title to be able to re-sell.

Again it's dependent on what the contract says as to what your options are.

I need a link to search codes about contracts in this instance.

Seriously though, would YOU sign a contract that was vague? Or would you sign a contract that had 2 different copies containing different information? One for you to follow and one for the seller to follow? (to their advantage)

Sue

Did you do that? Then maybe the incompetency defense might work. Try to calm down and give real facts rather than making up silly analogies.

[4Labs]

Originally Posted by ADBunting

What is the name of your state? Nevada

It's my understanding that in a valid business contract you must absolutely understand and both agree to the same conditions.

Firstly there have been some serious breachs by the seller. Not satisfying a lien, no mediation via the local RE Board, etc. There are also numerous minor breachs in the contract. I only found out about all of this when he had me served with an unlawful detainer.

From what I remember either all is valid or all is voidable. It would seem that you can't suddenly decide 14 months into the contract just to try to scam someone out of their down payment. His Corporation, that is the listed 'owner' also doesn't have a business license for our county.

I need information about void/voidable contracts. I had a license many years ago under my mother, who was a broker in So. California for many decades which is where I have a basic foundation for my questions. (realizing of course that it's in Nevada and many years later)

Any input or links to read the legalities on business contracts would be great.

Sue

Why did he have you served with an unlawful detainer? Are you in default on your contract payments?

[ADBunting]

Like I said, I have a land purchase contract/owner carry. Not a lease op, rental or lease. I have paid $26k down. I make monthly payments. I've paid all of my monthly payments on time.

Flying Ron...to say my analogies are "spurious" and "silly" is insulting and the definition is demeaning and totally doesn't fit my analogy of the situation.

The general definition of spurious is deceitful, deceptive, etc...

Basically would you want to buy an apple and the seller decides to swap it for a banana?

I'm sorry if it's too fundimental for you to understand.

I signed a contract to buy. Now he wants to rip me off by trying all kinds of questionable tactics to keep my down payment and reposess the property based on law in an incorrect jurisdiciton to be able to re-sell it when the RE market is picking up here.

I need links to research the validity of business contracts. You obviously don't know and insulting me isn't helping me find out what I need to know.

If you want calm facts I suggest you ask if you have any questions. I don't think I could have put it more clearly.

I also asked if you would sign a contract that was different for the seller and buyer (because the seller decided he might want to do something else down the track) but you as the buyer didn't know he was doing that, OR was the same for both of you but the seller decided down the track they wanted to do something else in spite of the contract (which is closer to what is happening). This isn't incompetance, this is fraud.

In answer to the other posted question: He has served me with an unlawful detainer. In a court that doesn't have jurisdiction to make judgement. He's trying to call the loan based on a rental agreement and this seems like an attempt to bully me out of what I have invested in this place.

I want to emphasize that I DO NOT have a rental agreement, lease, or lease op. I now have to go through a myriad of legal hassle that didn't need to happen to respond. He has been getting his payments every month. I have paid for endless repairs and I had suggested he purchase the property back from me late last year and heard nothing. He (the Corp I'm suposedly buying the place from) doesn't even have a license to do business in So. NV...

You can't have it both ways. Either it's a lease/rental or a purchase. If it's a lease/rental, then there is no way I'd pay 26k. Plus why would I be paying for all of the repairs, plumbing, bad flooring covered up by new carpet, etc? I've bought numerous properties in the past, rented and owner carry. This particular situation doesn't fall into any category and is insane.

I know what I signed but apparently the seller doesn't. (in addition to the fact that in several places he neglected to sign but I only found out after the fact...negligence by the Real Estate Agency)

A*



Your analogies are spurious. You've already made a conclusion and are making bizarre statements to try to substantiate. What the people who are hear need to know are the exact, calmly stated facts:

1. What exact written contract do you have?
2. Have you fully complied with your side of the contract?
3. What action has he taken to try to evict you?

You can hunt around for links to that, but there is no such principal in contract law. And real estate transactions are required to be in writing (and in most places with the option of recision in light of legal review) to that you will have understood it (the fact that you didn't read it or didn't understand what you signed isn't a defense unless you want to plead incompetency).

Again it's dependent on what the contract says as to what your options are.

I need a link to search codes about contracts in this instance.


Did you do that? Then maybe the incompetency defense might work. Try to calm down and give real facts rather than making up silly analogies.[/quote]

[4Labs]

Op you should have nothing to worry about if you went through the proper channels to buy this property on a land sale contract. You say you have a real estate background, I am assuming you know how to purchase properly under a seller carry back arrangement and how to protect yourself and your interests.

Did you go through the title company? Are you listed as having a vendee's interest in the property? Did you have a collection escrow account set up? All these things are there to protect you and the money you put down. He cannot take the property back if you are not in default. Did you sign a land/sale contract or was it a Note and Trust Deed?

Call the title company where you closed and ask them to do a search to see how you are vested in the property. Your land sale contract should have been recorded. There are alot of details missing from your original post. In order for us to help you, we need answers to these questions.

ETA: I just re read your original post and I don't understand why you think he should give you back your initial $26,000 down payment.

[FlyingRon]

Originally Posted by ADBunting

Like I said, I have a land purchase contract/owner carry. Not a lease op, rental or lease. I have paid $26k down. I make monthly payments. I've paid all of my monthly payments on time.

Fine, presumably there is no terms in the contract that would have allowed for termination, then?

Flying Ron...to say my analogies are "spurious" and "silly" is insulting and the definition is demeaning and totally doesn't fit my analogy of the situation.

It wasn't met to be demeaning, but when we asked for details so that we may help you and you provide strange analogies instead, it is frustrating.

The general definition of spurious is deceitful, deceptive, etc...

Actually, it just means false.

Basically would you want to buy an apple and the seller decides to swap it for a banana?

I'm sorry if it's too fundimental for you to understand.

Because the above makes no sense.

I signed a contract to buy. Now he wants to rip me off by trying all kinds of questionable tactics to keep my down payment and reposess the property based on law in an incorrect jurisdiciton to be able to re-sell it when the RE market is picking up here.

So answer the suit. If it's really in the wrong jurisdiction, then it's going to be a trivial matter.

If you want calm facts I suggest you ask if you have any questions. I don't think I could have put it more clearly.

I specifically did ask. I asked for the terms of the contract with the seller. Then you started talking about bananas. If you are asking for FREE ADVICE, you would do well to try to be supportive of those who are trying to help you. When you are asked a direct question, answer what is asked. We don't need your analysis of what the law is or you trying to make up analogies to explain your beliefs.

I also asked if you would sign a contract that was different for the seller and buyer (because the seller decided he might want to do something else down the track) but you as the buyer didn't know he was doing that, OR was the same for both of you but the seller decided down the track they wanted to do something else in spite of the contract (which is closer to what is happening). This isn't incompetance, this is fraud.

You're still making no sense. The contract is the same for both of you. What one of you believes one way or the other is IMMATERIAL. Real estate contracts must be in writing (statute of frauds). It is what it is says.

In answer to the other posted question: He has served me with an unlawful detainer. In a court that doesn't have jurisdiction to make judgement. He's trying to call the loan based on a rental agreement and this seems like an attempt to bully me out of what I have invested in this place.

If the contract has been someone otherwise voided, then an unlawful detainer is how he gets you, essentially, a squatter, off the land. What are the details he put in the suit. We can't answer squat with out details.

[QUOTE[
You can't have it both ways. Either it's a lease/rental or a purchase. If it's a lease/rental, then there is no way I'd pay 26k. Plus why would I be paying for all of the repairs, plumbing, bad flooring covered up by new carpet, etc? I've bought numerous properties in the past, rented and owner carry. This particular situation doesn't fall into any category and is insane
[/quote]
What would motivate you to pay is NOT material. What motivates you to make payments is NOT material What is material is the terms of your written contract AS THEY ARE WRITTEN not as you believe it means, not as you think the other party believes. What it says. Your answer to the unlawful detainer suit depends on what that suit says and what the original contract says.

I know what I signed but apparently the seller doesn't. (in addition to the fact that in several places he neglected to sign but I only found out after the fact...negligence by the Real Estate Agency)

WAIT A MINUTE! If he never signed, you don't DO NOT HAVE a contract. You do not have any ownership interest in the property. It's no wonder that an unlawful detainer has been filed.

[ADBunting]

and/or gross negligence and collusion by the Real Estate Agency.

I'm looking into filing complaints and charges in this instance.

Having a void contract because of his failure to sign doesn't mean I agreed to a lease or rental and certainly didn't just give him that amount of money.

April

[FlyingRon]

and/or gross negligence and collusion by the Real Estate Agency.

Then sue the real estate agency, but you'll have to explain th at. Failure of the seller to sign just means the contract was not accepted.
How did you get to the point of transferring substatnial sums of money without getting the signed contract back?

Having a void contract because of his failure to sign doesn't mean I agreed to a lease or rental and certainly didn't just give him that amount of money

What kind of money you paid or what you thought you were paying it for has no legal bearing on the situation. This seems to be a fundamental problem in this entire thread. YOUR INTENT is immaterial. What matters in real estate transactions is the written (signed) contracts.

The fact that he has served an unlawful detainer against you has squat to do with a lease either. It just means you have no right to be there (i.e., a squatter).

If you have money that you believe is due back to you, then go to civil court. However, I seriously suggest, as we have done before, that you get real legal assistance. You've made far too many mistakes so far to wing this.