[biker1]

It is not an issue of being friendly or not. The sellers should make the appropriate arrangements to have all of their belongings removed and the house left in the appropriate condition as may have been stipulated in the sales contract before closing. This should be verified at the walk-through before closing. If I am the buyer and this is not the situation at the walk-through then the closing will be delayed or additional consideration will need to be provided. This is a business transaction and it will typically go smoothly if both parties treat it as such and not anticipate or expect "favors".

Originally Posted by PaulDenise

What does 'access' actually mean?? If it is for something simple and you are there, maybe it is the friendly thing to do.

[New Englander]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I wouldn't accept that condition. Whenever I purchased a house, I always took possession immediately after signing the closing papers.

I agree. I wouldn't go for that.

[VillageIdiots]

I don't agree that it is normal. However, it's not unusual. It's typically a good faith request that you can either agree to, or not. But really should be handled up front in the purchase contract with the terms well defined. A similar, quite common, example is when a seller needs time to relocate after the sale, they may add conditions and terms to a contract where they actually rent back the home from the buyer for a set amount of time after the property has legally changed hands. When I sold my home before moving down here, I had the opposite situation. The buyer wanted to start moving items into my detached garage/barn prior to closing if/when the space became available as we packed our stuff up. I agreed to that in good faith and did not force those terms to be put into the contract. Bottom line, unless stipulated otherwise in a mutually agreed upon contract, the property is yours after closing and it is up to you whether or not you allow the seller access after that point. Sounds like the realtor was making a request to that effect on the seller's behalf, but it's up to you whether or not to allow it. Even if it is common, it's still your call.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by VillageIdiots

I don't agree that it is normal. However, it's not unusual. It's typically a good faith request that you can either agree to, or not. But really should be handled up front in the purchase contract with the terms well defined. A similar, quite common, example is when a seller needs time to relocate after the sale, they may add conditions and terms to a contract where they actually rent back the home from the buyer for a set amount of time after the property has legally changed hands. When I sold my home before moving down here, I had the opposite situation. The buyer wanted to start moving items into my detached garage/barn prior to closing if/when the space became available as we packed our stuff up. I agreed to that in good faith and did not force those terms to be put into the contract. Bottom line, unless stipulated otherwise in a mutually agreed upon contract, the property is yours after closing and it is up to you whether or not you allow the seller access after that point. Sounds like the realtor was making a request to that effect on the seller's behalf, but it's up to you whether or not to allow it. Even if it is common, it's still your call.

I agree. But, I don't think it is a good idea to rent the house you just bought back to the seller, even for a day. I would never do it.

[Arlington2]

I had the reverse occur. A buyer's closing was delayed and wanted to move in before closing. I felt like an a_hole, but declined to let them in. Afterwards I became more comfortable with my rational decision rather than an immediate decision to be a nice guy. I think your realtor is asking you to take risk at no benefit to you. Often we are inclined to be the nice person and accept the risk.

[Kahuna32162]

We've always had a pre closing inspection and walk thru to guarantee that there where no surprises left by the seller. If they can't get moved out before the closing date, move it.

[bagboy]

Possession is a negotiated item in a real estate purchase agreement. It can be anywhere from "at closing" to a later, predetermined date. Anything over 10 or 15 days should include financial consideration for the buyer. There should be a final walk through by both parties the day of possession. Real estate purchase agreements are an unemotional contract. Terms and conditions are all spelled out and negotiated before both parties sign it.
The good faith deposit by the buyer is placed in escrow, and will be forfeited only for non performance by the buyer. It won't be used for repairs/cleaning etc. Keep in mind, in most cases the seller does not know the buyer. It's happened many times that a seller has cleaned and vacated the property only to have a buyer fail to close the deal, for whatever reason. Hence, possession a few days after closing is a very reasonable condition of the agreement.

[Dan9871]

Originally Posted by wwdgd

The MLS realator I am working with said the sellers want to have access to the house for the remainder of the day after a morning closing. This did not sound right to me. The MLS agent said this common and/or normal for transactions down here. Is this true?

It's not really a question of what is "normal" it's what you want to agree on. If you let the seller stay after closing, even with a rental agreement, they may stay longer than the agreement says and it may take you a long time to get them out.

If the seller vacates before closing and you back out that could leave the seller on the hook for payments on two houses or at least leave them in a very inconvenient circumstances.

When we sold out house in MA the standard purchase agreement said that the house would be broom swept for the final inspection before closing.

I certainly have had friends who sold their house and closed with an agreement that let them stay in the house for a few weeks, so letting the seller stay in the house is not that unusual.

But in any case whether the seller stays in the house after closing is something that should be in the agreement you and the seller sign. And if it says that the seller can stay in the house after the closing it is something you should be sure is iron clad that the seller will be out... you probably need a lawyer to do that.

We had a relative that let a niece stay in their house while the relative was away for the winter. A friend of the niece that had drug issues (and the relative knew) called the relative to see if there was a hidden key she could use to get into the house and stay for "just one night". The relative told her where the key was.

Anyhow she stayed for over a month and even the Police could not remove her because the relative had told the friend where the key was and that gave her permission to say.

So I, as a buyer, would want the seller out before closing... you just have no idea what might be going on in the sellers life.

[vintageogauge]

Don't do it, have them out of there before you sign. It could take you months to get them evicted if they decide to stay. Tell your agent that they have to be out before you sign at closing.

[birdawg]

Try getting someone out of a house in Florida. Good Luck

[wwdgd]

Thank you for all the replies. This issue has been settled. The closing date was moved one day and the sellers will be out for the pre closing inspection.

[Nucky]

Originally Posted by wwdgd

Thank you for all the replies. This issue has been settled. The closing date was moved one day and the sellers will be out for the pre closing inspection.

Great Job, happy for you! Yippeeeee

[vintageogauge]

Originally Posted by wwdgd

Thank you for all the replies. This issue has been settled. The closing date was moved one day and the sellers will be out for the pre closing inspection.

There you go.

[dnobles]

No once you go to closing that’s it

[Mamalea]

When we bought, the seller wanted to spend another day/night. We think they were just pushing because of quite a bit of back and forth on negotiations for purchase. We said "NO". In addition, what if they were hurt after you owned the house. Insurance/suit??