Quote:
Originally Posted by retiredguy123
How is the seller being screwed? It appears that the sales contract is only a few weeks old. Unless the seller can prove a significant financial loss, they can just put the house back on the market without losing anything except a few weeks. If the contract had an unusual deposit or inspection clause, the licensed broker had a fiduciary duty to explain it to the unsophisticated buyer. But, if it is a standard sales contract, the broker has no right to tell the buyer that they cannot get money back that is being held in escrow by a third party. And, this situation does not appear to be a buyer with cold feet. The escrow money is not a penalty to be used by the broker to force a sale.
The OP's original question was "can the $10,000 deposit money be refunded"? The answer to that question is most likely yes.
|
What do you know about the seller's situation? What do you know about the contract. From all we can gather based on the OP's post, the contract allows the seller 10 days to fix inspection issues. This does not sound like complicated language. We have asked the OP for details multiple times and that is all we got. So that isn't a standard contract, but not surprising given the buyer did not have an agent representing them. Up here in MA it's a seller's market big time. Inspections are being waved and sometimes the contract says the buyer won't ask for any repairs unless over a certain amount (like $25K). Inspection concessions are common in real estate deals.
How is the seller being screwed? IDK, but hypothetically... Maybe they are buying a new build and based the closing date on what this buyer had for closing on their home. Now the Villages is going to fine them daily for closing late if they need the proceeds from this sale to close.
Maybe the seller has a home under contract somewhere else and a mortgage rate lock that expires if this sale doesn't happen when contracted.
Maybe the seller had a home sale contingency on their new purchase and once under contract on their sale they are now locked in to their new purchase, but this delay will cost them their deposit.
Maybe the seller is moving to another state to take care of their dying mother and needs the proceeds for medical costs and had everything planned based on the closing date of this contract.
Maybe maybe maybe. We all heard the buyer's side. What we heard so far is that they found an inspection issue and were told that the seller claims the issue has been fixed per the purchase agreement. But oh, the buyer has a sick husband so everyone feels bad for them and takes their side. We know half the story and to be honest, the half we heard shows the seller did what they were supposed to and the buyer should be following the contract.
The deposit is to hold the buyer to the contract. I'm sorry but the buyer should lose their deposit if the seller abided by the contract and had the issue fixed. Of course, I'm not dismissing that the repair needs to be confirmed. But you sign a contract you follow it. If you don't understand the contract you get someone, an agent or a lawyer, to explain it to you.
Now, could I be completely wrong? Of course. Maybe the contract does have a clause for the buyer to terminate based on the inspection. Maybe the realtor is crooked as hell and in cahoots with the inspector and the seller. Maybe they all knew about the water issue and totally planned on screwing this buyer over. It's not like their business is almost completely dependent on word of mouth and a good reputation. Oh, wait, what. Yeah, I could be wrong. But I'm leaning more toward I'm correct.