Quote:
Originally Posted by retiredguy123
I agree that there are a lot of maybe's and no one knows the seller's situation. But, we do know the following:
1. There was water damage that was visible, but not disclosed to the buyer.
2. Immediately after the inspection, the broker asked the buyer to modify the contract by extending the inspection period, but the buyer wanted to cancel the deal instead.
3. The broker repeatedly told the buyer, incorrectly, that the deposit could not be refunded. To me, this sounds like coercion.
These facts alone should indicate that this sales contract was not a true "meeting of the minds", which is required for every legally enforceable contract. In my opinion, there is plenty of reason to void the contract.
|
Yeah, definitely some weird stuff there. I assumed (maybe I missed some posts) that the water issue happened between the offer and the inspection. I did not know the the seller knew of the water issue and didn't disclose it.
Not sure of the timing of the repair and why they needed an extension. It seems they did get it fixed within the 10 days. Perhaps the agent thought it would take longer. The whole 10 day thing is very weird anyhow. If I were a seller I wouldn't assume I could get any repair done in 10 days. Just getting a contractor available in that time is difficult.
So yeah, if it went over the 10 days the buyer could back out and that was her out as far as I can tell. But apparently the repair was easy. If I were the buyer I'd be checking the carpet or whatever was repaired in the house to make sure it's been rectified. I'd not be happy with flooring that was wet and not replaced. Fixing the leak is only the first part.
We don't know what language the realtor used. What people post isn't always accurate. The OP sounds afraid and could have embellished the realtor's response. She could have said, "The seller would like to fix this issue. They aren't sure it can be done in 10 days. Would you extend that? If they do get it fixed within 10 days your deposit would be at risk by backing out."
But that being said we shouldn't assume this was all nefarious. There are definitely details missing and some of the details we have seem strange so I'm not sure how accurate they are. I'd love to see the contract, at least the inspection part of it.