• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Nullifying a Purchase Agreement

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

L

learning

Guest
We are in the process of foreclosing on a real estate property. We have a buyer who made an offer to purchase and we accepted. However, we did not get a copy of the contract (he came to our house) and when he finally faxed it to us, the first page of the document is not at all what we originally agreed to. Also he stated that he would pay us earnest money, yet it has been over a month and none has come to surface.

Now we have a buyer who may be interested. Is our first offer still valid since it was substituted and no earnest money. I am suspicious that the first offer is stalling until the redemtion period ends so he can cut us out of the deal and we don't sell to anyone else.
 


HomeGuru

Senior Member
Sorry, no one on this website can tell what you agreed to and did not agree to as that information constitutes the terms and conditions of the contract.
Suffice to say, you should hire that attorney that you should have hired before accepting the offer.
 
Last edited:
J

J. Ducaine

Guest
contrary to your previous advice, it seems logical to esxtrapolate from your request that the first "buyer" is in violation and your contract is "voidable". In other words, tell them in writing you're moving on with another offer and that you'll ket them know if you've incurred damages due to detrimental reliance upon their offer for purchase.
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
J. Ducaine said:
contrary to your previous advice, it seems logical to esxtrapolate from your request that the first "buyer" is in violation and your contract is "voidable". In other words, tell them in writing you're moving on with another offer and that you'll ket them know if you've incurred damages due to detrimental reliance upon their offer for purchase.
My response: "in violation" of what? You don't even know what was agreed to in the contract. And would the contract be void, voidable or unenforecable? And what constitutes "damages due to detrimental reliance upon an offer for purchase"?
Extrapolate please.
 
Last edited:
J

J. Ducaine

Guest
voidable means "at your option". you can proceed if the buyer still desires to purchase or you can walk away from the contract. this presumes they are "truly" in violation of the contract. if someone tells me that they "havent received the money" and "its been over a month" it is presumed that the buyer was supposed to have NOT take this long - thus the terms of the contract. I have told many, many buyers to go screw themselves due to their lack of performance. I have even cancelled a "poor" deal for a "better" deal due to a buyer on one of my properties, simply on anticipatory breach.
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
J. Ducaine said:
voidable means "at your option". you can proceed if the buyer still desires to purchase or you can walk away from the contract. this presumes they are "truly" in violation of the contract. if someone tells me that they "havent received the money" and "its been over a month" it is presumed that the buyer was supposed to have NOT take this long - thus the terms of the contract. I have told many, many buyers to go screw themselves due to their lack of performance. I have even cancelled a "poor" deal for a "better" deal due to a buyer on one of my properties, simply on anticipatory breach.
My response: where in the law does it state that if money is not paid in over a month, then it is presumed? Where in the subject contract by this post does it state that?
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
J. Ducaine said:
guru, you are fired!
My response: yes, I am fired.
Fired up to help people on this website with their real estate questions.
Fired up to make sure the correct responses are provided.
 
J

J. Ducaine

Guest
ive always givin true advisement. facts. you have negatively (unintelligibly) responded since my first posting. if you had disagreed (as EVERY TIME you did) you could have simply addressed the writer and extracted more information. now, in other postings from you, you have simply called me crazy, on drugs, and have resorted to playground name-calling. you are a libel suit in its essence. your name gives you away. and the time you spend on me solidifies this.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top