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.
