Problem with Foreclosure House Purchase

[ecmst12]

You can't sue to force someone to do what you think is "the right thing to do". You sue to force someone to do what they are LEGALLY OBLIGATED to do. There is a very big difference.

 

[firedawg]

You can't sue to force someone to do what you think is "the right thing to do". You sue to force someone to do what they are LEGALLY OBLIGATED to do. There is a very big difference.

You don't feel that when a business sends a contractor to do work on a house and the contractor damages said house they are not legally obligated to pay for the damages? If that is the case, then I guess all of these insurance companies selling general liability, indirect liability, and other similar types of liability policies are scamming the persons/businesses purchasing them. I know small claims courts don't make anybody do anything. Only monetary damages can be awarded if the case is proved against the defendant.

 

[justalayman]

Thanks for your reply. I understand feeling responsible is not the same thing as being liable. Then there is a question of doing the RIGHT thing. When I purchased the home I expected to receive it "as is", exactly the same as it was at the time I signed the contract as the day I closed. I did not expect the house to be damaged by the contractor the bank hired. I did not expect the nice security bars to be missing other than the two I requested to be removed. How can I control what happens between the time of the final walk-through and the time of closing? Irregardless, a person should not have been ripped off and the bank should have made things right for the customer and then sued their irresponsible contractor.

You keep getting into moral or ethical actions, not legal actions. Feeling responsible and "doing the right thing" are not legal theories which you can base a suit upon.

as to getting the home in the condition you signed the contract: remember, you are the one that said you could not close with it in that condition (why I don't know. I know many people who have purchased homes that are not eligible for a C of O at the time of purchase) and subsequently asked the bank to have a couple sets of the bars removed.

Irregardless, a person should not have been ripped off and the bank should have made things right for the customer and then sued their irresponsible contractor.

Regardless of what you think, you signed the documents to accept the home as it was at the time of closing. They went a step further to attempt to appease you. You aren't happy. If you really think the bank owes you something, sue them. If you aren't willing to do that, then let it go.

 

[nextwife]

If you wished control over the contractor, you should have negotiated a credit or escrow to cover the work, and then YOU hire and oversee the work, and pay from credit/escrow, after closing.

 

[Smith03]

As the seller, you pay the estate agent for their services and the estate agent is therefore acting on your behalf. It is your interest they will represent and the buyer should bear this in mind if they are interested in a house being sold through an estate agent.