![]() |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| | |||||||||||||
| |||||||
| | |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
Problems at Final Walk ThroughWhat is the name of your state? Arizona I am set to close on a house on March 30, 2007. This date has been set since the contract initiation on February 8, 2007. After our inspection period, we submitted a request to have some items repaired. The seller agreed (in writing) to repair most of the items. Those negotiations were completed February 26 at which time I deposited additional earnest money into the escrow account as per requested in the contract terms. I have signed all my loan documents and done everything requested of me. Yesterday (March 27, 2007), we conducted our final walk through inspection. It was stated in the contract that this could be done up to 3 days prior to closing. Most of the items we requested to be repaired have not been repaired or have not been done as was stated in the agreement (i.e. by a licensed professional with receipts provided). Most of the personal property of the seller is still on the property (including 2 broken down VW vans and various engine parts) and items such as plumbing and electrical items that were functioning at inspection are no longer in good working order. We issued a Cure Period Notice of 3 days. My loan rate lock period ends on March 30 (closing date and also end of cure period). At this point, I am so fed up with the shenanigans of the seller I would be happy just to walk away from this deal. My real estate agent is trying to get me to accept a nominal fee in lieu of repairing the items. I have stated that unless the seller wants to pay my closing costs, I am not interested in negotiating. It seems cut and dry that I can just walk away if he is in breach of contract at the close of the cure period--but I feel like there are unforeseen consequences. Can you advise? |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
As an alternative, you could take your documents to a competent real estate attorney in your area...
__________________ * * I am not an attorney. Review the information yourself to make an informed decision. Communication is KEY - 10 mins of talking now can save you months of headaches later! Masterfully stating the obvious to the oblivious! (Thanks SP!) Chuckle of the day: Quote:
Gender references shall apply equally to the other gender. I will not correct gender mistakes (unless I want to) |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
more problemsI appreciate your concern that a real estate lawyer is the best option. I am in the process of trying to find one. I guess my question is more assuming that the contract is on the up and up (ithe language comes straight from the Arizona Board of Realtors). It clearly states that we can have inspections and submit requests to have any items fixed and the buyer can either agree, disagree, or agree to partial terms. He did the last and submitted a counter-offer. I agreed to his terms. It also says that if he hasn't done the agreed upon repairs three days prior to close of escrow, he is in breach of contract. Ok, so we issue a cure period notice which is specified in the contract as the first step to resolve issues. My realtors were negotiating a escrow hold back agreement with his realtor today. I began to read about that and became concerned that my Mortgage Lender should be informed of this action--well when I suggested that my Mortgage broker said that the escrow company could do it without the lender ever finding out. At this point, according to the sellers agent, there is no indication that this guy is even going to move out of the house by close of escrow--nevermind the repairs that need to be done. It is looking more and more like legal action will need to be taken--so am I wrong to insist on verifying that a holdback is in accordance with the mortgage lender's policies? I certainly do not want to find out that I have done anything to arise suspicion, but the realtors. mortgage brokers (not affiliated with lender), and title company are acting like I am ruining everything by doing so. It is also now being impressed upon me that simply getting out of the contract isn't really an option. Why do they make it sound so simple in the contract if this isn't really the case? |
![]() |