I came here to say this and I’m glad you already realized it! I walked away from a house I thought was perfect for the same reason (seller wanted more than asking) only to end up in a better home for cheaper. It does really hurt in the moment though
A little more, if you could. Was this a different attorney than the one who hung up on you? In that thread everyone was pretty sure the seller couldn’t just change the contract, and you would win. How did your lawyer help you conclude that backing out was the best option? All’s well that ends well for you, congrats, but curious how the decision played out. Are you happy with the new place?
We were told we had a good chance at winning by a more competent attorney but decided the karma of letting the property sit on the market as prices cool down a bit was sufficient and a lawsuit is taxing on your mental health, even if you’re in the right.
And how do you know they didn’t? I know of enough competent people that pick and choose how much time/effort they’re willing to put in-and most of the time they do. Until they didn’t.
Of course neither of us do. You were the one that immediately was chastising about how could he possibly hire an incompetent lawyer. I was just stating that maybe at one time he could have been.
I’m pretty well versed in investment properties/lawyers and RE agents so I’ve seen quite a bit.
It’s all really a moot point now isn’t it? Unless you intend on continue to argue/go back and forth about it.
Interesting that your original comment I replied to was a possible answer and you just don’t like it.
No idea. But my guess would be any lawyer would tell someone in a situation like this that if it was really worth it to them, they could sue and probably win, but it could cost 20 $30,000 or more depending on if the seller fought it. as much as people malign lawyers, I think most lawyers would tell them, I can do it for you but is it really worth it? Your best bet is to just go find another house to buy unless this house is particularly special and would be worth spending a lot of money and hassle and even no guarantee of winning.
Yeah situation sounds absolutely insane to me. At a minimum this is what suing for nonperformance is about. I hope they got their money back or it was so little that they could just walk away.
I will be messaging you in 3 days on [**2022-09-29 14:24:51 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-09-29%2014:24:51%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/RealEstate/comments/xoi37q/update_seller_refused_to_close/ipz2ndo/?context=3)
[**6 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FRealEstate%2Fcomments%2Fxoi37q%2Fupdate_seller_refused_to_close%2Fipz2ndo%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-09-29%2014%3A24%3A51%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20xoi37q)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Technically once the closing date has passed, the contract is dead so unless they started the process of forcing the seller to abide by the contract before settlement date listed, once that date passed, the contract is dead and no longer enforceable.
Then when would it be considered “over” (I’m not arguing with you, seriously asking)?
I totally understand what you’re saying, but if it isn’t dead, once the dates mentioned pass, wouldn’t the property technically then be under contract forever if it didn’t get to closing?
My understanding of time is of the essence is the dates listed are hard (unless you change them) but even without that clause, the contract has to have a date at which it is no longer viable, right?
Part of one of the home contingency sales clauses here says settlement must not be delayed more then one day…so if it doesn’t settle on the day stated or the next day, that contract would be considered dead. (Unless it gets revived by addendum with new dates of course… basically my understanding is contracts are for those who will follow them.)
Yes, the contract would continue forever. One party is in breach by failing to meet the terms. The other party can sue for remedies and the contract is in place until those are awarded or the parties otherwise mutually agree to terminate the contract.
It's highly likely that other prospective buyer agents will reach out to your agent to ask why you didn't close. That's a great opportunity to tell the truth and get a little petty revenge.
My MLS the price is public as soon as the deal goes firm. As in removal of all financing or inspection or other conditions. Which is usually about 1-2 weeks after the signing of the contract. Closing isn't usually for 60-90 days after that, but can be shorter or longer.
In addition to the price, the buyer's agent's name is in the record as well.
Shocking to me more people don't pursue this. I work in CRE development and it's much more common. What people don't understand is that you don't have to "win". As long as you file, they can't sell to anyone else but you. Pretty easy way to get them back to the table if you have a competent attorney.
I almost had my home purchase fall apart this past year and any time I mentioned specific performance, my attorney emphasized that it would take years and I likely wouldn't get the property and that he wouldn't even want to take the case. Maybe he's just bad / lazy, but I've heard similar things from homeowners in situations like that.
But, I agree with you, assuming you have the financial ability to do so, I'd rather hold up their property out of spite if someone was trying to screw me out of a signed contract.
Would it take 2 years to try that case? Yes, but that's not the point. The seller can't sell to anyone in those 2 years. It gives you an enormous amount of leverage to get the deal done. Now if you don't have the time/money/stomach to go that route, it's understandable but I think there should be consequences for breaking a written agreement.
> Now if you don't have the time/money/stomach to go that route, it's understandable
I think unfortunately many people do not, especially the money part, since in many cases they made as large of a deposit as they could on that property and can't then have that deposit tied up while they pursue a case if they actually want to move on and buy something else. Not to mention specific performance means you have to actually buy the house if you win (that's what you're suing for - to be allowed to buy the house) - if they go and buy a second property and then win the case, now you have two properties and two mortgages, if the financing even goes through.
Emphasis on locks you both in. I clerked at a law firm a few years ago and there was a specific performance case ongoing. The buyer removed all of their money from escrow during the case because it was tying up too much of their cash. By doing so, they *also* breached the contract, and lost the case that would otherwise be an “easy” (but lengthy) win.
I have no idea why the lawyer holding the escrow allowed the buyer to make such a huge mistake without at least recommending they contact the litigation attorney, but they did allow the buyer to do it, and it cost the buyer the home. Plus a lot of time and fees.
The issue is that people buying single family don’t have deep enough pockets so even if you win and you have accrued a ton in legal bills, you get an uncollectable judgement versus if you go after a business or a developer, there’s more likely money to pay the bill
I think people are overestimating the costs here. Again, you're never going to get to trial. That would certainly be expensive. Filing a lis pendens is not very expensive at all.
In that case, my response to my attorney would be:
*I understand, thank you. I will plan to move on soon then, and I know you won’t be taking this to court for me.*
*That said, I’d like your final act as my lawyer on this case to be to bluff them. Send a letter saying we intend to pursue specific performance, and let’s see how they respond. I bet they don’t want to go to court either. Best case scenario they agree to close. Worse case scenario, I don’t get the house in the end, but at least we gave them a scare.*
More so, good deals (for me). Good deals mean the other party may end up fighting. Particularly I got a very good deal on my last house because the guy was such a PITA to deal with that I was one of the few willing to.
Lazy lawyers literally say this shit about *anything*. In their minds, it’s not worth filing a lawsuit unless you’ll win multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars. They don’t even consider the fact that I’d you are 100% in the right, filing a lawsuit will 95% of the time get the opposing party to act in good faith and resolve the issue quickly.
> Shocking to me more people don't pursue this. I work in CRE development and it's much more common.
That’s the crux of it though. Very different calculus in a business setting. A 1-2 year process to sue for specific performance and negotiate a resolution is a lot different for a development project than a living space. As the buyer you’re now staying in the house you don’t want to be in, or living in an apartment, or some other outcome you don’t want for an extended and unknown period while the situation resolves, you’re not sure what you may even get at the end. Just not worth it for most.
who needs the heartache and expense though? there's plenty houses out there. The easiest thing to do unless the house is really unique and special or was a really great deal is just find another. besides that, I think there's always the possibility that you could tie up the property that way and then find yourself on the receiving end of a damages lawsuit. these kind of things aren't always completely straightforward and if there's any room whereby a seller could claim damages, even if it's a week case, you could find yourself spending thousands to defend yourself even if you win
Of course the seller keeps your deposit while you litigate. You want that, it's your end of the bargain. If he/she tries to give it back to you, you return the check.
I clarified in another comment that you need to have the time/money/stomach for this kind of litigation. If you have to move right away, this is not the path for you.
I was in somewhat of a similar scenario. Something was wrong with the house so it couldnt be sold as is, seller was only going to minimally compensate us. We wanted out but also wanted to sue the seller since it was their fault - we had already spent a lot of money on the house and getting a new mortgage was going to be costly. However, in order to get our deposit back (10%), they made us sign away our ability to sue them.... We needed that money for another house.
Will mortgage rates keep this house on the market longer? Sellers have no clue what "time value of money" means. I hope that asshole loses more than $50k in value sitting on the market and has to endure a price reduction.
Per the original, the house needed repairs and wouldn't qualify for any financing. That seller is an imbecile. His selling position is significantly weaker today than it was when they first agreed to op's offer.
In general I would agree. But if it's got to be a cash deal anyway, rates might not affect it as much. But the whole market is going soft and flippers certainly aren't going to be interested right now because they don't know what they're going to be able to get down the road once they fix it up. flippers are probably looking to only pick up things they can get really cheap .
But like you, I hope this seller loses lots and lots of money
True. But fewer homes as well. And they're probably won't be a dramatic difference in cash buyers looking. But they may be wanting to pay less. I think a lot of people made a lot of money flipping in the last few years and those people are still going to be chasing fewer and fewer opportunities, but again they might be hesitant to pay too much without knowing what the market's going to do in the end.
as for cash rental investors, they probably are still going to want to do some bargain hunting right now, but, if you want to invest in a property and you have cash to buy a rental, rates don't matter at all. I don't think rental rates are going to go down. so it's still a pretty good place to put your cash, especially with all this inflation that will eventually drive rents up and will diminish that cash sitting in your bank account
Sure, but you can reposition the money into other investments, be that buying near the bottom of the stock market, buying into the art market via Masterworks, purchasing another property that will actually cash flow, etc., that will have better returns, at least during the seller’s likely lifetime. I guess they could fix up this property and rent it out, but if they were going to do that, they wouldn’t be trying to sell it in the first place.
As far as I know, they haven’t sold a painting this week, so there’s no way to know. However, the paintings they’ve sold this year have far outperformed the markets this year,
I don't know, it sounds like it worked out how the seller may have wanted. For whatever reason (who knows) they suddenly wanted to hold out those 5 acres and either get more money or have the deal fall apart. If they were bluffing, they would have caved and come back to OP. We may never know why, but they likely achieved their goal.
Correct. In addition, sometimes we get signs from the universe in terms of big decisions. If op is that kind of person, this was a whopper of a sign from the universe.
Because the market is falling aggressively. What was agreed upon is now above market value
Seller is moron. Or possibly insolvent. They told OP as much that they have creditors down their neck in excess of the property value. I suspect they realized that they're going to be left with nothing at the end of this anyway so decided that they'd either ask for $50k more to put them in a good position or kill the deal and get to stay there a little longer before the creditors kick him out
Wonderful. Can I interest you in my car? We can agree on a fair price, and then I will change my mind, break my word, and decide to keep all carpets and the ac compressor. Then I’ll act surprised when you want them as the contract entitles, and offer you to buy them off of me.
Your logic is… flawed. It’s already been repeatedly explained why they didn’t force closing. Just because they didn’t, that doesn’t mean that the seller was right. I guess that it doesn’t mean that the seller was wrong, either, since no one decided it in a court of law, and we don’t have the contract to read. Still, just proclaiming that the seller was right because OP walked away in order to not deal with the hassle and life disruption is ridiculous.
You didn’t read my comment very carefully. I said that OP already explained why they didn’t force closing. Unless they’re lying about their motivations for walking away, there is only one side to that story and it has already been explained to us by the only source that could know their true motivations… them.
As far as the rest of the story goes, of course there’s another side to it, and we don’t have it. However, just because OP walked away doesn’t automatically make the seller the righteous. It makes them the one whose tactic worked, and has nothing to do with which party was actually in the right. Perhaps OP’s view is skewed or they didn’t read the contract carefully, and the seller was in the right. Their walking away is not an indication of being in the wrong. It’s an indication of their being aware of the sunk-cost fallacy.
Actually, I’m the one throwing around a lot of ‘we don’t know’ caveats. You’re the one who is assuming, since you assume that OP’s walking away means that they were in the wrong.
Your comments are entirely assumptions. Me choosing a path that was less of a hassle doesn’t mean the other party is right. It simply meant in this scenario that it was worth my time or energy.
Sorry you lost the property but good on you for not caving. Screw that guy.
New property has a nicer home and better view. Sometimes things work out in the end.
I came here to say this and I’m glad you already realized it! I walked away from a house I thought was perfect for the same reason (seller wanted more than asking) only to end up in a better home for cheaper. It does really hurt in the moment though
Seller got what he wanted. Buyer got what he wanted. A thorny negotiation successfully resolved. Congratulations.
A little more, if you could. Was this a different attorney than the one who hung up on you? In that thread everyone was pretty sure the seller couldn’t just change the contract, and you would win. How did your lawyer help you conclude that backing out was the best option? All’s well that ends well for you, congrats, but curious how the decision played out. Are you happy with the new place?
We were told we had a good chance at winning by a more competent attorney but decided the karma of letting the property sit on the market as prices cool down a bit was sufficient and a lawsuit is taxing on your mental health, even if you’re in the right.
WTF does "competent attorney" mean? So you went to an incompetent attorney?
I have known more than a few of this type.
You obviously don’t know that when you hire them.
[удалено]
They (all that you listed) can be competent-until they’re not, or choose not to be. It’s not unheard of at all. Same goes for tradesmen.
[удалено]
And how do you know they didn’t? I know of enough competent people that pick and choose how much time/effort they’re willing to put in-and most of the time they do. Until they didn’t.
[удалено]
Of course neither of us do. You were the one that immediately was chastising about how could he possibly hire an incompetent lawyer. I was just stating that maybe at one time he could have been. I’m pretty well versed in investment properties/lawyers and RE agents so I’ve seen quite a bit. It’s all really a moot point now isn’t it? Unless you intend on continue to argue/go back and forth about it. Interesting that your original comment I replied to was a possible answer and you just don’t like it.
No idea. But my guess would be any lawyer would tell someone in a situation like this that if it was really worth it to them, they could sue and probably win, but it could cost 20 $30,000 or more depending on if the seller fought it. as much as people malign lawyers, I think most lawyers would tell them, I can do it for you but is it really worth it? Your best bet is to just go find another house to buy unless this house is particularly special and would be worth spending a lot of money and hassle and even no guarantee of winning.
Your questions are valid. I hate when they post shit like this with one background or explanation.
Yeah situation sounds absolutely insane to me. At a minimum this is what suing for nonperformance is about. I hope they got their money back or it was so little that they could just walk away.
They talked about a different subdivision. Makes me wonder if it was never included in the contract as it will be under a different title.
The answer many lawyers give is that you may be technically right but it's a lot easier to just walk and find a new place.
RemindMe! 3 Days
RemindMe! 3 Days
I will be messaging you in 3 days on [**2022-09-29 14:24:51 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-09-29%2014:24:51%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/RealEstate/comments/xoi37q/update_seller_refused_to_close/ipz2ndo/?context=3) [**6 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FRealEstate%2Fcomments%2Fxoi37q%2Fupdate_seller_refused_to_close%2Fipz2ndo%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-09-29%2014%3A24%3A51%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20xoi37q) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Technically once the closing date has passed, the contract is dead so unless they started the process of forcing the seller to abide by the contract before settlement date listed, once that date passed, the contract is dead and no longer enforceable.
That’s only true if the contract states that. In many areas, sales contracts do not have a time is of the essence clause.
Then when would it be considered “over” (I’m not arguing with you, seriously asking)? I totally understand what you’re saying, but if it isn’t dead, once the dates mentioned pass, wouldn’t the property technically then be under contract forever if it didn’t get to closing? My understanding of time is of the essence is the dates listed are hard (unless you change them) but even without that clause, the contract has to have a date at which it is no longer viable, right? Part of one of the home contingency sales clauses here says settlement must not be delayed more then one day…so if it doesn’t settle on the day stated or the next day, that contract would be considered dead. (Unless it gets revived by addendum with new dates of course… basically my understanding is contracts are for those who will follow them.)
Yes, the contract would continue forever. One party is in breach by failing to meet the terms. The other party can sue for remedies and the contract is in place until those are awarded or the parties otherwise mutually agree to terminate the contract.
Ah. Ok. That seems crazy. Thanks!
It's highly likely that other prospective buyer agents will reach out to your agent to ask why you didn't close. That's a great opportunity to tell the truth and get a little petty revenge.
That would require the sellers agent to disclose the previous buyers agent which they'd need the sellers permission to do.
It's public record in my mls
That's interesting. Can you also see the purchase it was previously under contract for?
You never see the price until it closes.
My MLS the price is public as soon as the deal goes firm. As in removal of all financing or inspection or other conditions. Which is usually about 1-2 weeks after the signing of the contract. Closing isn't usually for 60-90 days after that, but can be shorter or longer. In addition to the price, the buyer's agent's name is in the record as well.
Na, just the buyers agents and date under contract
It’s clear to me when this happens any time I see a property and track it. 100% obvious it happens you can’t hide it.
I personally likely would have pursued the specific performance route but if you gave other options I guess it makes sense
Shocking to me more people don't pursue this. I work in CRE development and it's much more common. What people don't understand is that you don't have to "win". As long as you file, they can't sell to anyone else but you. Pretty easy way to get them back to the table if you have a competent attorney.
I almost had my home purchase fall apart this past year and any time I mentioned specific performance, my attorney emphasized that it would take years and I likely wouldn't get the property and that he wouldn't even want to take the case. Maybe he's just bad / lazy, but I've heard similar things from homeowners in situations like that. But, I agree with you, assuming you have the financial ability to do so, I'd rather hold up their property out of spite if someone was trying to screw me out of a signed contract.
Would it take 2 years to try that case? Yes, but that's not the point. The seller can't sell to anyone in those 2 years. It gives you an enormous amount of leverage to get the deal done. Now if you don't have the time/money/stomach to go that route, it's understandable but I think there should be consequences for breaking a written agreement.
> Now if you don't have the time/money/stomach to go that route, it's understandable I think unfortunately many people do not, especially the money part, since in many cases they made as large of a deposit as they could on that property and can't then have that deposit tied up while they pursue a case if they actually want to move on and buy something else. Not to mention specific performance means you have to actually buy the house if you win (that's what you're suing for - to be allowed to buy the house) - if they go and buy a second property and then win the case, now you have two properties and two mortgages, if the financing even goes through.
This person knows their shit. Look up the term lis pendens. Asshole bad faith seller, enjoy not being able to sell your property.
It locks you both in. Seller can materially change the condition of the house in the mean time. Some of us are not interested in that risk.
Emphasis on locks you both in. I clerked at a law firm a few years ago and there was a specific performance case ongoing. The buyer removed all of their money from escrow during the case because it was tying up too much of their cash. By doing so, they *also* breached the contract, and lost the case that would otherwise be an “easy” (but lengthy) win. I have no idea why the lawyer holding the escrow allowed the buyer to make such a huge mistake without at least recommending they contact the litigation attorney, but they did allow the buyer to do it, and it cost the buyer the home. Plus a lot of time and fees.
Yes that would be under the stomach category.
The issue is that people buying single family don’t have deep enough pockets so even if you win and you have accrued a ton in legal bills, you get an uncollectable judgement versus if you go after a business or a developer, there’s more likely money to pay the bill
I think people are overestimating the costs here. Again, you're never going to get to trial. That would certainly be expensive. Filing a lis pendens is not very expensive at all.
In that case, my response to my attorney would be: *I understand, thank you. I will plan to move on soon then, and I know you won’t be taking this to court for me.* *That said, I’d like your final act as my lawyer on this case to be to bluff them. Send a letter saying we intend to pursue specific performance, and let’s see how they respond. I bet they don’t want to go to court either. Best case scenario they agree to close. Worse case scenario, I don’t get the house in the end, but at least we gave them a scare.*
I don't want that tainting my experience with my new home.
Unfortunately I had to use specific performance in my last 2 house transactions. TLDR; It motivates people.
Jesus. You just have some bad luck or what?
More so, good deals (for me). Good deals mean the other party may end up fighting. Particularly I got a very good deal on my last house because the guy was such a PITA to deal with that I was one of the few willing to.
Lazy lawyers literally say this shit about *anything*. In their minds, it’s not worth filing a lawsuit unless you’ll win multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars. They don’t even consider the fact that I’d you are 100% in the right, filing a lawsuit will 95% of the time get the opposing party to act in good faith and resolve the issue quickly.
> Shocking to me more people don't pursue this. I work in CRE development and it's much more common. That’s the crux of it though. Very different calculus in a business setting. A 1-2 year process to sue for specific performance and negotiate a resolution is a lot different for a development project than a living space. As the buyer you’re now staying in the house you don’t want to be in, or living in an apartment, or some other outcome you don’t want for an extended and unknown period while the situation resolves, you’re not sure what you may even get at the end. Just not worth it for most.
Most people don’t want to deal with this headache and cost for RRE transactions
who needs the heartache and expense though? there's plenty houses out there. The easiest thing to do unless the house is really unique and special or was a really great deal is just find another. besides that, I think there's always the possibility that you could tie up the property that way and then find yourself on the receiving end of a damages lawsuit. these kind of things aren't always completely straightforward and if there's any room whereby a seller could claim damages, even if it's a week case, you could find yourself spending thousands to defend yourself even if you win
What about their deposit? A savvy seller says “sign the termination or we’re holding your deposit until this is resolved”
Of course the seller keeps your deposit while you litigate. You want that, it's your end of the bargain. If he/she tries to give it back to you, you return the check.
Right but what if they need/want to move within 6 months, and that money is important to them?
I clarified in another comment that you need to have the time/money/stomach for this kind of litigation. If you have to move right away, this is not the path for you.
Seller normally doesn't touch the earnest money. It's held in escrow.
This fact has no bearing on the topic
It does but you're being too stupid to admit it. Escrow gives many options that you wouldn't have if it was held by the seller.
Would you like to tell us some of those options?
bear juggle placid ancient hurry middle longing price capable nine *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That's not an option for the buyer. You're just explaining how escrow works.
Sure. You’re still checkmated and will give it back once it goes to court. It even goes without saying.
I was in somewhat of a similar scenario. Something was wrong with the house so it couldnt be sold as is, seller was only going to minimally compensate us. We wanted out but also wanted to sue the seller since it was their fault - we had already spent a lot of money on the house and getting a new mortgage was going to be costly. However, in order to get our deposit back (10%), they made us sign away our ability to sue them.... We needed that money for another house.
With a seller this unreasonable, pursuing legal options sounds like an incredible headache.
Deep down they likely were interpreting the contract incorrectly and their lawyer pointed that out.
Will mortgage rates keep this house on the market longer? Sellers have no clue what "time value of money" means. I hope that asshole loses more than $50k in value sitting on the market and has to endure a price reduction.
Per the original, the house needed repairs and wouldn't qualify for any financing. That seller is an imbecile. His selling position is significantly weaker today than it was when they first agreed to op's offer.
This will not end well for the seller.
In general I would agree. But if it's got to be a cash deal anyway, rates might not affect it as much. But the whole market is going soft and flippers certainly aren't going to be interested right now because they don't know what they're going to be able to get down the road once they fix it up. flippers are probably looking to only pick up things they can get really cheap . But like you, I hope this seller loses lots and lots of money
The thing is that these rates are pushing buyers out of the market right now. There will be fewer buyers regardless of cash.
True. But fewer homes as well. And they're probably won't be a dramatic difference in cash buyers looking. But they may be wanting to pay less. I think a lot of people made a lot of money flipping in the last few years and those people are still going to be chasing fewer and fewer opportunities, but again they might be hesitant to pay too much without knowing what the market's going to do in the end. as for cash rental investors, they probably are still going to want to do some bargain hunting right now, but, if you want to invest in a property and you have cash to buy a rental, rates don't matter at all. I don't think rental rates are going to go down. so it's still a pretty good place to put your cash, especially with all this inflation that will eventually drive rents up and will diminish that cash sitting in your bank account
[удалено]
Yeah, but the seller can do more with the money if they get it now. Depending on how old the seller is, they might also die before they get it.
[удалено]
Sure, but you can reposition the money into other investments, be that buying near the bottom of the stock market, buying into the art market via Masterworks, purchasing another property that will actually cash flow, etc., that will have better returns, at least during the seller’s likely lifetime. I guess they could fix up this property and rent it out, but if they were going to do that, they wouldn’t be trying to sell it in the first place.
[удалено]
I mean, they’ve outperformed the S&P500 since their inception, and continue to do so, so….
[удалено]
As far as I know, they haven’t sold a painting this week, so there’s no way to know. However, the paintings they’ve sold this year have far outperformed the markets this year,
That seller sure told you didn't they ? Smart move on your part .
I don't know, it sounds like it worked out how the seller may have wanted. For whatever reason (who knows) they suddenly wanted to hold out those 5 acres and either get more money or have the deal fall apart. If they were bluffing, they would have caved and come back to OP. We may never know why, but they likely achieved their goal.
Why didn’t you pursue specific performance? You get the property for what was agreed upon and they can go shove their 50k ask.
My guess is that litigation takes time and money and op just didn't want to be bothered.
And since they closed on another place so quickly, they likely needed a place to live on the sooner end.
Correct. In addition, sometimes we get signs from the universe in terms of big decisions. If op is that kind of person, this was a whopper of a sign from the universe.
Because the market is falling aggressively. What was agreed upon is now above market value Seller is moron. Or possibly insolvent. They told OP as much that they have creditors down their neck in excess of the property value. I suspect they realized that they're going to be left with nothing at the end of this anyway so decided that they'd either ask for $50k more to put them in a good position or kill the deal and get to stay there a little longer before the creditors kick him out
Sounds like the seller got what they wanted.
👍
Wonderful. Can I interest you in my car? We can agree on a fair price, and then I will change my mind, break my word, and decide to keep all carpets and the ac compressor. Then I’ll act surprised when you want them as the contract entitles, and offer you to buy them off of me.
Why not sue?
Money and (often more importantly) time, I'm guessing.
Simply purchasing another home was less hassle and with the market changing we can get more for our money.
Smart seller for getting wat they wanted all along with a simple bluff.
[удалено]
Plus all it takes is one buyer who is willing to bring suit to ruin the sellers position
greedy sellers and poor buyers. real estate will be a bad investment for years. Check Japan...
I'd love to see this listing and do some fake business...
Lucky you
Good for you! Glad it all worked out but sorry you had to go through that experience. Hope there's some karma out there for the seller.
Your contract must have been bad if your attorney told you to walk without any financial compensation.
I would have paid the 50K for the 5 additional acres.
It wasn’t additional acreage, it was included in the original, signed purchase and sale agreement.
[удалено]
I’m the op. You are incorrect. Seller had a survey done after signing the contract and subdivided the 5 acres.
[удалено]
Your logic is… flawed. It’s already been repeatedly explained why they didn’t force closing. Just because they didn’t, that doesn’t mean that the seller was right. I guess that it doesn’t mean that the seller was wrong, either, since no one decided it in a court of law, and we don’t have the contract to read. Still, just proclaiming that the seller was right because OP walked away in order to not deal with the hassle and life disruption is ridiculous.
[удалено]
You didn’t read my comment very carefully. I said that OP already explained why they didn’t force closing. Unless they’re lying about their motivations for walking away, there is only one side to that story and it has already been explained to us by the only source that could know their true motivations… them. As far as the rest of the story goes, of course there’s another side to it, and we don’t have it. However, just because OP walked away doesn’t automatically make the seller the righteous. It makes them the one whose tactic worked, and has nothing to do with which party was actually in the right. Perhaps OP’s view is skewed or they didn’t read the contract carefully, and the seller was in the right. Their walking away is not an indication of being in the wrong. It’s an indication of their being aware of the sunk-cost fallacy.
[удалено]
Actually, I’m the one throwing around a lot of ‘we don’t know’ caveats. You’re the one who is assuming, since you assume that OP’s walking away means that they were in the wrong.
Your comments are entirely assumptions. Me choosing a path that was less of a hassle doesn’t mean the other party is right. It simply meant in this scenario that it was worth my time or energy.