Forms used in real estate transactions are the product of years of fears. What was once a handshake agreement to pay X Dollars for That Land is no less than nine pages, soon to be a dozen, of if this, and that, or this, but not that conditions. If something once happened to somebody, someone wants to insert a provision into the boiler plate form to give everyone some options to try to avert the isolated incident they once saw. The time wasted by people who don’t require someone to think for them so that those who don’t want to learn is astronomical and the outcome is greater harm than good.
We have a choice. Keep it simple and allow buyers and sellers, their attorneys and real estate agents to structure terms to satisfy the expectations of parties of each transaction, or build a monster to address whatever might happen, once happened, or is unlikely to happen. Building the monster might provide options few people would have thought of, however if a person can’t think of the solution on their own, it’s a good chance they won’t understand the solution you provided for them.
Rather than trying to think for those who want the thinking done for them, wouldn’t it be better for the industry to raise the standard of comprehension and ability to draft contracts, or remove contract drafting responsibility from the licensee? Eliminating these pre-written, boiler plate, inflexible provisions might increase the competency of our industry by reducing the participation of those who choose not to learn. As those individuals and their respective firms fall behind those who strive to learn and adjust to new conditions, the market will naturally eliminate the stragglers.
It’s a choice between increasing the competency of the professionals for the benefit of the consumer, or decreasing the need for competency for the benefit of the least competent practitioners to the detriment of the consumer.
