Mass Produced Offer Documents Cost Home Buyers Thousands of Dollars.

You can have any color car you want, as long as you want black. The Model T was built efficiently in mass production assembly line factories,  for anyone who wanted to get from here to there on their own schedule without depending on a horse.  The mass production model groups everyone into the same box. By standardization, the producers have control, and the product is reliably consistent, even if it’s not reliably effective.

The residential offer to purchase documents (including firm crafted addenda) are  inefficient, unreliable, products costing the American home buyers billions of dollars annually.  Real estate values are pushed up and beyond the reach of a large segment of the population because these documents reduce even the most attractive buyer to ordinary. When critical terms of the Offer are equal on paper, the only difference maker in the eyes of a home seller is PRICE.

Smart Realtors know how to customize an Offer for their buyer-clients, to make the document work to their advantage while giving the owner all of the security they desire at a price they are willing to accept. A customized Offer tells the owner everything they want to know about the buyer’s commitment, ability, reliability to make a decision to commit to sell to them.  Oh, sure some people want to know about families, career, where you’re from, what you look like, how much you love their decorating, but they won’t make a commitment to take unreasonable risk because of your personal story.

Customized Offers are the solution to rejection. Customized offers don’t cost you anything. In fact, they are more efficient, more powerful, more fair, more acceptable, and can be the difference in thousands of dollars in the price you pay to own your first choice home. 60 Seconds to a Customized Offer

Title Insurance Contingencies Merit Consideration

To get to closing we direct our attention to the inspection, appraisal, and financing contingencies.  Another condition of the Offer receives very little attention and yet it’s a very big hurdle. The Title Insurance contingencies, page 7 of the 9 page WB-11 Residential Offer to Purchase, pose a serious risk to a successful closing.

Provision of Merchantable Title Lines 348-352:  This contingency requires the Seller to provide a Title Insurance Commitment to Buyer or Buyer’s attorney, NOT LESS THAN 5 BUSINESS days before closing. The commitment shall show  evidence that the title is merchantable (Suitable for its purpose) to the standards as stated in lines 326-334.

Here’s where things get risky. Title Not Acceptable for Closing, lines 353-359, allow the buyer to object to title BY THE TIME SET FOR CLOSING.  Once the buyer objects, the closing is extended to allow Seller a reasonable time to clear the objection. The buyer’s obligation is to permit the Seller no more than 15 days to resolve and the closing is extended AS NECESSARY.  (Uncertainty).  If the Seller is unable to remove the objection, the seller must notify Buyer. Once the notice is received, buyer has 5 DAYS to to waive the objection. Unless the buyer takes the affirmative step to deliver written notice and waive the objection, the offer becomes Null and Void.

Without seeing this happen in person, it’s easy to see the problems sellers are facing until this contingency is satisfied.  Which raises the question, Are buyer’s giving notice of satisfaction of the Title Commitment contingency or are we walking into closing with the buyer holding the right to object before the Time Set For Closing?

I have seen an attorney use the Title Unacceptable for Closing contingency used by an attorney to force a seller to release a buyer who objected to Covenants and Restrictions, when there was no contingency to approve Covenants and Restrictions.  The attorney stated the Covenants would be an exception to the title insurance policy and the buyer would find that exception objectionable…hence, we may as well part ways now.  What? Wasn’t “recorded building and use restrictions” an agreed upon exception per lines 326-331?  The lawyer’s argument met no objection from the Seller’s attorney (maybe to simply move on)  and the buyer was released.

Maybe the Title Contingency is an exit clause we should pay more attention to.

Property Damage After Acceptance Prior to Closing

An easy to happen and complex to navigate situation licensees address is property damage after acceptance and prior to closing.  The WB-11 Residential offer to Purchase begins to address this on lines 206-215. In compliance with Wis. Stat 706.12, unless this provision is not part of the Offer, the parties have expressly agreed to who has responsibility (buyer or seller) to repair the damage and under what conditions the contract may be terminated and parties released.

WRA on Damage after Acceptance
When the licensees become aware of damage which occurred after acceptance and prior to closing decisions have to be made regarding disclosure, damage assessment, repairs, closing date, and resolution.  The prudent licensee will be careful to direct their clients to legal counsel to interpret their rights and obligations, and to their insurance companies to determine their coverage. The parties will look to the provisions of the Offer to determine the avenue they will take to move forward or to separate.

Attorneys may advise their clients to maintain their right to remain silent on the new condition, make the necessary repair and proceed to closing.  Because  the buyer may have recession rights when they receive an amendment to the RECR with previously undisclosed conditions, sellers may be advised by their attorney to not amend the RECR or issue a new RECR.  Even though a seller may not have disclosure obligations, the licensees do. A Disclosure of Material Adverse Fact form is available for licensees to disclose conditions they are aware of.

Occupancy May Change Everything

Buyer pre-closing occupancy is a condition which may alter the buyer’s rights and seller’s obligations for repairs, expenses, and resolutions.  Pre-closing occupancy is a seriously risky proposition. The Addendum O (Occupancy Agreement) has been modified to make it easier for licensees and parties to incorporate occupancy provisions into offers.  I wonder if that’s a good idea considering the complexity of the issues involved with occupancy. Anything which contributes to parties avoiding consulting their lawyer is not an advantage to their safety. Just my opinion.

Water Everywhere

It happened here in 2008 and it will happen again. Spring is flood season in Wisconsin. Frozen ground, rain, melting snow, clogged drainage sewers, rising river levels are the perfect storm conditions for property damage after acceptance and prior to closing. It’s never too soon to sharpen your skills in the disclosure of defects and conditions responsibilities.  Heavy rain is the forecast for today through tomorrow.

 

Is an Email a Notice?

Hypothetical Situation:  The terms of the contract include this statement: “Within 24 hours of receipt of the report, Buyer shall deliver a copy of the report and a notice to Seller stating the defects the Buyer objects to, or this contingency shall be considered satisfied.”

At 3:00 PM on October 21st, the buyer receives “the report”.  At 9:00 AM on the 22nd,  the Buyer agent attaches the report to an email and sends to the Listing Agent. The email reads in part:  “The buyer is concerned about the condition of the furnace. They would like ask Seller to have an HVAC contractor service the furnace.”

It is now 4:00  PM on October 22nd.  The Listing Agent informs the Buyer Agent that the Seller considers the contingency satisfied because the 24 hours has lapsed without the Buyer delivering a Notice of Defects per the terms of the Offer.   The Buyer agent believes his email was sufficient to be the notice called for in the Offer.

Is the email a Notice? Maybe. Determining if the buyer delivered notice timely is a question for the courts.  Deciding which forms to use is the responsibility of the licensee. Whether or not an email, text, or phone call is sufficient the licensee could first  determine if an approved form is available. (Wis Stat 452.40(2) and REEB 16 explain our obligation to use approved forms). In this case, a  Notice is available. The term notice is used in the Offer, the agent drafting the Offer is a licensee, and the parties could reasonably expect the licensees to use proper forms. It’s probably reasonable that the listing agent and the seller considered the email a “heads up” that a Notice was coming.  The Notice did not arrive and the agent and Seller concluded the buyer had a change of mind and opted to let the contingency be satisfied.

Could an attorney consider an email from him or her a sufficient notice. Probably. The attorney does not share our obligation to use available forms.

If the reason for sending an email, text, or leaving a voice message has anything to do with saving time, or for convenience, the question of whether or not a Notice is required is probably answered. Yes.

When the Notice or Amendment appears unfavorable, why do we call the other agent?

Working through inspection related contingencies is when the most agent to agent calls (by calls I mean text, email, and phone calls) are initiated.  Why is a call made so quickly in response to Notices and Amendments?  I believe it’s an unnecessary practice.  Here’s why:

The Offer to Purchase is an agreement between the Buyer and Seller. Sufficiently written contingencies (and every licensee believes they wrote sufficient contingencies) include the steps the parties will take when this or that happens. The contingencies define key terms. The parties agreed to these steps and terms. When one party follows those terms by sending a Notice or Amendment, or doesn’t follow those terms, by sending the wrong form or no form, the receiving party has a predetermined course of action. Nothing in the contract or license law states a licensee must, or should, make a call to object, question, debate, or educate the sender.  The approved and understood options include the recipient party responding by Notice, Amendment, acceptance, or silence. Of the  approved forms for licensees, email, text, and phone calls are not mentioned for good reason.

Lawyers may have permission to speak on behalf of their clients. They may have the protection to make representations. Licensees do not have the legal authority of an attorney. A good way to lose the authority we still have to complete forms is to fail to complete forms. Let’s think about this.

A call (text, phone, email, fax) is documentation of a message from one licensee to another. The commitment to the statements is arguably attached to the sender and whomever responds.  There is no commitment to the statements from the principals. A Notice, Amendment, Counter Offer on the other hand, is signed by the principals confirming the words are their words; the promise is their promise; the responsibility is their responsibility.   Documentation is clear when appropriate forms are signed.

If the intent of a call in lieu of a proper form is to speed the process or challenge the other agent, the intent is reason enough that the form is a better choice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inspection Contingency: Two ambiguous deficiencies you want to avoid

Wisconsin Residential Offer to Purchase page 9 of 9, Inspection Contingency

Deficiency number 1. NOT TESTING.  Line 410 reads: “This contingency only authorizes inspection, not testing…”. To add clarity, lines 395-409 have the definition of the terms inspect and test.  You can inspect, but you shall not test.   It’s agreed, testing can not be done without a specific contingency and the inspection contingency is specifically not for testing.  Or, is it? At least one firm in Madison has an addendum with an additional contingency altering the inspection contingency to apparently permit testing.

“Addition to Home Inspection Contingency: It is understood that if the buyers’ home inspector recommends that additional inspections/test be completed, Seller agrees to that portion of the inspection being extended for ____days…”.  I put the problematic words in bold.  If I’m interpreting this correctly, if a home inspector recommends a radon, mold, lead paint, water, or air quality test be done, the contingency is extended.  I don’t know if the parties are agreeing to permit the test, or just extend the contingency satisfaction deadline.

Practice Tip:  Do not include any reference to testing under the Inspection Contingency. Use a specific testing contingency with stated acceptable levels.

Deficiency number 2, NOT ENTIRE PREMISES. line 412 to 413: “This Offer is further contingent upon a qualified independent inspector or independent qualified third party performing an inspection of________________________________________________________________________(list any Property component(s) to be separately inspect, e.g., swimming pool, roof, foundation, chimney, etc.)…”. Even with the hint telling us to insert components of the property, some licensees are writing “Entire Premises”.  The consequence of the words “entire premises” in the blank where specific components are to be written may be this:  A qualified independent inspector or independent qualified third party may do the inspection of the property instead of a “Wisconsin registered home inspector” as was first stated on lines 410-411.

When a component (fireplace, roof, foundation…) is inserted in the blank line as intended, the contingency is not ambiguous, and we have an agreement by the parties to allow a buyer to have a Wisconsin registered home inspector inspect the entire property, and a qualified third party or other inspector inspect the component stated, such as “the fireplace, the roof, the swimming pool, the shed, etc.”.

Practice Tip:  When in doubt about what might be written in the blank lines, first look to see if the creators of the form offered any hints or suggestions immediately after the blank lines. I can think of two places where they’ve done so in the Offer. If there is no suggestion, and you feel it necessary to insert something, make sure the words you choose complete a sentence and do not contradict the intent of the contingency.

 

 

Secondary Offers

Owners who accept offers contingent on the closing of a buyer’s real estate (commonly called a sale of home contingency) typically have a provision in that offer allowing them to accept “Secondary Offers”. The secondary offer attractive to a seller is one that is reasonably similar to the offer they have and more certain to close.

A buyer who makes a secondary offer is wise to give the seller at least a few days to untangle themselves from the primary accepted offer. By agreeing to “sit tight”, promising to not withdraw their offer for  a set number of days, the secondary buyer gives the seller the time they need to force their buyer to make a decision to commit or step aside. We won’t know the number of days the seller needs to wrap things up with the first buyer, but we can assume it is at least 3 days. The more time the seller is given the more attractive the second offer becomes.

A well prepared secondary buyer will provide a know questions left unanswered pre-approval letter  or proof of funds available to close. The more risk the buyer assumes, the more likely the seller is to find the offer attractive enough to attempt to let the first buyer go and get into business with buyer two.

There is no certainty in becoming primary by having an accepted secondary offer. While somebody may suggest the seller is able to move a secondary buyer to primary, be cautious. The primary buyer does have some leverage to maintain their position. Secondary buyers who are made primary, should require proof that the seller is free and clear from buyer 1. A cancellation and mutual release agreement signed by all parties may be sufficient proof. A licensee who participates in moving a secondary buyer to primary position without a cancellation and mutual release from the first buyer is in a perilous position.