Ridiculous FHA rules
rile
rule, because of lead paint, that any house built before 1978 cannot
have any "peeling, checking or flaking paint". The property has no
lead paint....all buildings have been repainted since the late 80's.
An inspector came out, rejected it for that reason. My son and I
scraped, power washed, scraped again, and painted. They guy has come
back two more times and still rejected it. All he does is walk around,
take pictures and make a recommendation. He doesn't touch the paint,
scrape it or anything. All of the paint is tight. The worst is, the
buyers don't want us to do the painting...they want to repaint it a
different color.
Any ideas....we are at the ends of our wits.
Big Jim
Doug Miller
>We are selling a house to a buyer using an FHA mortgage. There is a
>rule, because of lead paint, that any house built before 1978 cannot
>have any "peeling, checking or flaking paint". The property has no
>lead paint....all buildings have been repainted since the late 80's.
>An inspector came out, rejected it for that reason. My son and I
>scraped, power washed, scraped again, and painted. They guy has come
>back two more times and still rejected it. All he does is walk around,
>take pictures and make a recommendation.
What did he recommend? Did you do it?
ransley
You dont know if lead was in the first coats. If he rejected it it
must be peeling so Id say you didnt scrape well enough, have a pro
painter look at it and show you how to do it right.
Phisherman
wrote:
I agree with the other post. Move on and get another buyer.
benick
"rile" <ril...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fe7c7517-d1c1-44cb...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Don't sell to a buyer with FHA/VA financing or do as the guy told you the
WAY he told you to do it.....There is no other ways....
Oscar
"rile" <ril...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fe7c7517-d1c1-44cb...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Since you already agreed to sell it FHA to a buyer, I hate to tell ya,
you're at their mercy.
I had a property sold FHA, because I thought it would be best being a lower
value house. It was in the area of a military base. Huge mistake on my
part. When I first signed the contract, I attempted to have a dollar amount
affixed of $4,500 for repairs. FHA won't play games, you do what they say.
rile
The guy told us nothing. He just took pictures and put them in a
report. He didn't even show us where the problem areas were located.
It is typical wood siding where the sun hits it all the time. In
fact, on his last inspection after doing everything we could see, he
specified he wanted nobody at the premises when he was there. At $75
a pop, he must need some money on his boat payment of something.
rile
>
> - Show quoted text -
The recommendation I refered to was his recommendation to delay the
mortgage at the buyers bank. He hasn't recommended anything
concerning the house. In fact, in his last inspection, he admitted to
the bank that he wasn't an expert on house paint.
benick
"Oscar" <no...@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:h5qnht$a0m$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
ransley
>
> - Show quoted text -
Wanting nobody on the premises is strange.
Frank
I'd assume "the guy" has a supervisor and start appealing up the line.
Years ago, I had a problem with a county building inspector and this is
what I did and got it resolved.
Big Jim
Every buyer has a laundry list of things they want. Usually you agree
to fix some and the lets the others slide. House is sold everyone is
happy. I would have my lawyer contact the buyers with an official
letter demanding they secure a ortgage and set a closing date or the
deal is over. Add the fact that there was no specific repair list and
"inspector"s admissission of lack of expertise. The buyer will get
another mortgage if they really want the house. or they will put
pressure on the lender to get to the bottom of it.
Oscar
"Big Jim" <bigji...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:70a85336-5727-4f9f...@l35g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>You're never "at the mercy" of a buyer unless you are desperate.
>Every buyer has a laundry list of things they want. Usually you agree
>to fix some and the lets the others slide. House is sold everyone is
>happy. I would have my lawyer contact the buyers with an official
>letter demanding they secure a ortgage and set a closing date or the
>deal is over. Add the fact that there was no specific repair list and
>"inspector"s admissission of lack of expertise. The buyer will get
>another mortgage if they really want the house. or they will put
>pressure on the lender to get to the bottom of it.
You're absolutely wrong when talking about FHA. The homeowner signs a
contract, to sell FHA/VA. Obviously you've never been there. A lawyer can't
modify a contract already entered into, good luck with that one. Been
there, done that.
The more I read your response, the more you show you have no clue. On FHA
there can not be a specific list for repairs. Been there, done that. Do you
not realize the Homeowner already entered into the contract?
Put pressure on the lender? Do you even know what a FHA/VA loan is? Again,
good luck with that one.
Big Jim
necessary to obtain a C.O (if required). I doubt the seller signed a
contract putting them at the mercy of a lender. Their lawyer would
have seen that during attorney review and killed the deal ASAP. If I
were the homeowner, my lawyer would be earning his pay and I certainly
wouldnt get jerked around by what seems to be a fishy sounding
inspection process. I'd make no unnecessary repairs. If you were a
sucker and got jerked around too bad for you. Most of us with savvy
don't get taken by anyone even the gov't. If the lender refused to
mak the loan the deal would be dead.
Oscar
> Their lawyer would have seen that during attorney review and killed the
> deal ASAP. If I
>were the homeowner, my lawyer would be earning his pay and I certainly
>wouldnt get jerked around by what seems to be a fishy sounding
>inspection process.
You really don't have a clue. When you enter into a contract to sell
FHA/VA, your laywer can't make exceptions. You either sell FHA/VA, or you
don't, it's that simple.
I suggest you don't reply to threads, to which you have no knowledge. The
more you reply, the bigger idiot you become.
Smitty Two
"Oscar" <no...@invalid.net> wrote:
> I suggest you don't reply to threads, to which you have no knowledge.
Dammit Oscar, if we all followed that suggestion, there'd only be about
3 post per day on here. The great thing about usenet is seeing how much
bluffing you can get away with.
dpb
> "Big Jim" <bigji...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ce2c293e-f19c-4721...@e27g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>> Their lawyer would have seen that during attorney review and killed the
>> deal ASAP. If I
>> were the homeowner, my lawyer would be earning his pay and I certainly
>> wouldnt get jerked around by what seems to be a fishy sounding
>> inspection process.
>
> You really don't have a clue. When you enter into a contract to sell
> FHA/VA, your laywer can't make exceptions. You either sell FHA/VA, or you
> don't, it's that simple.
Well, sorta' yes and sorta' no...
Fundamentally all the FHA is is an insurer policy to the lender--there
are certain requirements from FHA but the inspection is actually _not_
specifically theirs. From the FHA.gov site in advice to the potential
buyer--
"The FHA does not guarantee the value or condition of your future home,
and the FHA does not perform home inspections. If you find problems with
your new home after closing, FHA cannot give or lend you money for
repairs, nor can it buy the home back from you. FHA cannot help you in
discussions you may have with the builder or seller.
When you make a written offer on a home, you should insist that the
contract states that the offer is contingent (dependent) on a
satisfactory (to the buyer) home inspection conducted by a qualified
inspector. If you are satisfied with the results of the inspection, then
you can proceed with your offer or make a counter offer if the results
are not satisfactory."
So, as far as the FHA is concerned, its up to the buyer to accept/reject
the results of the inspection and it is normally the buyer's nickel to
pay for same. It sounds as if in this instance the lender the potential
buyer is using is taking over the prerogatives of the buyer buy refusing
to approve the deal even if the potential buyer is satisfied.
Probably not too much the seller can do there unless the buyer is
willing to push as he doesn't have a lot of clout; the lender probably
isn't really concerned about the deal closing. If this is a represented
sale, one would think the realty agent should be earning their keep in
expediting this; if it's a private sale then the lawyer route may be
best alternative--of course, in that case it's probably unwise to not
proceed w/o at least a token, cursory representation even as seller. Of
course, there's also the potential conflict of interest issue w/ realty
agents depending on which State has jurisdiction; some have much more
stringent guidelines than others for disclosure of their potential/real
conflicts of interest.
And, of course, the other sticky wicket has to do w/ the particular
state requirements for inspection/condition; some of them are quite
onerous in my view but certainly shouldn't be this difficult to meet for
a house in reasonable condition. Finding out just what are the actual
requirements is another piece of information the seller needs to find
out and see what, if anything, is actually not fulfilled that is a
requirement other than just taking the inspector's word for it.
I'd also suggest a call to the FHA for straight skinny from them
1-800-CALL-FHA (225-5342).
There certainly is also a cottage industry of inspectors many of whom
are nothing more than barely over scams; sounds like there may be a
problem there. There are State oversight and registrations for these
folks; should check up on this person/company and also there may be an
illegal sweetheart deal w/ the appraiser/inspector/lender.
All in all, it really sounds as though the OP simply hasn't done much
actual research on the actual requirements to be met nor used many
(any?) of the resources available to him to find out what has to be
done, who says so, and how--seemingly simply relying on the buyers
agents to do so who aren't actually in his employ and therefore serving
his interest. Altho it begs the question of why, if he is paying for
these inspections, the information seems to be being taken solely for
the benefit of the purchaser--altho this is the normal role, it isn't a
COI because the buyer normally is the purchaser of the service and so
the inspector is in his employ. If that isn't the case here, that is
definitely a COI and is probably at least against a State code of ethics
if not actually a violation of statute.
All as a long-winded way of say the OP needs to get somebody on his
nickel and if the inspector is, slap him up the side 'o the head w/ the
fact he's getting paid by one side and seemingly working for the other
in the deal.
--
Oscar
"dpb" <no...@non.net> wrote in message
news:h5sd62$upp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
<snip>
> All as a long-winded way of say the OP needs to get somebody on his
> nickel and if the inspector is, slap him up the side 'o the head w/ the
> fact he's getting paid by one side and seemingly working for the other in
> the deal.
Actually, Big Jim reminds me of myself, back when I didn't have a clue
about FHA. People tried to give me advice _not_ to sell FHA. I was one of
these, yeah I'll get my lawyer. Well, lawyer's don't give advice for free,
if you have one on a retainer, it's still not free. Bottom line, you're not
gonna break a contract, without paying through the nose.
sligoNo...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>We are selling a house to a buyer using an FHA mortgage. There is a
>rule, because of lead paint, that any house built before 1978 cannot
>have any "peeling, checking or flaking paint".
>The property has no
>lead paint....all buildings have been repainted since the late 80's.
Repainting over lead paint does not stop it from being a problem.
All lawyers of paint that may contain the lead must be removed to
assure there is no problem.
I don't know what the law says must be done but I would bet the FHA
does have a recommended procedure. Have you asked them what needs to
be done? They are the ones you need to make happy. You may need to
go over the inspector's head.
Doug Miller
>The recommendation I refered to was his recommendation to delay the
>mortgage at the buyers bank. He hasn't recommended anything
>concerning the house. In fact, in his last inspection, he admitted to
>the bank that he wasn't an expert on house paint.
Did he state why he rejected the house?
If so, have you corrected the problems?
If not, have you asked him why?
Doug Miller
>rule, because of lead paint, that any house built before 1978 cannot
>have any "peeling, checking or flaking paint". The property has no
>lead paint....all buildings have been repainted since the late 80's.
Very unlikely that the property "has no lead paint." It may have no *exposed*
lead paint, but if it was built before 1978, it's very unlikely that it has
none at all.
>An inspector came out, rejected it for that reason. My son and I
>scraped, power washed, scraped again, and painted. They guy has come
>back two more times and still rejected it. All he does is walk around,
>take pictures and make a recommendation. He doesn't touch the paint,
>scrape it or anything. All of the paint is tight. The worst is, the
>buyers don't want us to do the painting...they want to repaint it a
>different color.
>Any ideas....we are at the ends of our wits.
Sounds to me as though the buyer may have changed his mind about buying the
house, and is using the inspection as an excuse to back out of the
transaction. Check the purchase agreement, preferably with the help of an
attorney experienced in real estate law. Such contracts typically (in my
state, at least) allow the buyer to unilaterally cancel the agreement if the
inspection discloses a "major defect". In my opinion, lead paint that is not
peeling, checking, or flaking is not a "major defect" -- but I am not a
lawyer, which is why I suggested you should consult one. If you've hired a
real estate agent to sell the home, the agency almost certainly has a lawyer
on retainer, if not on staff, who would I'm sure be happy to explain to the
buyer (or the buyer's lawyer) the difference between "major" and "minor"
defects.
dpb
Afaict there is no contract w/ the seller at this point...he apparently
has an offer but that's no contract...
In general, one is incredibly shortsighted to undertake a major
transaction w/o the services of appropriate counsel...
--
Big Jim
an attorney. I don't know where you are at but here's how it works in
NJ. 1.Seller places home for sale at a price. 2. Buyer likes house ,
makes offer. 3. If offer is reasonable, contracts are drawn up with
estimated closing date, guarantee of C.O. if necessary , buyer agrees
to secure funding, buyer can inspect home and reject for defects and
so forth. 4.Attorneys review contract make changes if necessary. 5.
Buyer pays for inspections . 6. List of deficiencies is presented to
seller. 7. Seller agrees to fix some or allof them. 8. Buyer agrees
or walks away. 9. On closing day money changes hands and papers are
signed.. Of course the lender can reject a home with major defects
and therefore buyer cant buy and deal is dead. Just because you got
played doesnt mean everyone is like you. I've sold and bought several
houses. I've rejected buyers for wanting too much and walked away as a
buyer when seller wouldn't fix things. . My current home is 1935
vintage. Sure there may be some lead paint under layers of latex.
When I sell it I of course will repaint as necessary for appearance
but any buyer who thinks I will pay for total stripping etc can go
elsewhere.. I dont care who his mortgage lender is.
Oscar
> Afaict there is no contract w/ the seller at this point...he apparently
> has an offer but that's no contract...
You missed the OP original statement. "We are selling a house to a buyer
using an FHA mortgage."
FHA just doesn't go around inspecting houses, because someone is thinking
about buying this one or that one. There must be an offer & acceptance.
Thing is, FHA goes in after the acceptance, at least they did in my case.
The way the OP sounds, they're doing it the same way to them.
> In general, one is incredibly shortsighted to undertake a major
> transaction w/o the services of appropriate counsel...
I'll tell ya, it was a while ago when I sold FHA, and a lesson well
learned. Unfortunately, they are unscruptulous realtors (like you didn't
already know this), which will talk people into selling FHA/VA, without
telling the drawbacks.
Oscar
Here in NJ you are considered a fool to buy/sell real estate without
an attorney. I don't know where you are at but here's how it works in
NJ. 1.Seller places home for sale at a price. 2. Buyer likes house ,
makes offer. 3. If offer is reasonable, contracts are drawn up with
estimated closing date, guarantee of C.O. if necessary , buyer agrees
to secure funding, buyer can inspect home and reject for defects and
so forth. 4.Attorneys review contract make changes if necessary. 5.
Buyer pays for inspections . 6. List of deficiencies is presented to
seller. 7. Seller agrees to fix some or allof them. 8. Buyer agrees
or walks away. 9. On closing day money changes hands and papers are
signed.. Of course the lender can reject a home with major defects
and therefore buyer cant buy and deal is dead. Just because you got
played doesnt mean everyone is like you. I've sold and bought several
houses. I've rejected buyers for wanting too much and walked away as a
buyer when seller wouldn't fix things. . My current home is 1935
vintage. Sure there may be some lead paint under layers of latex.
When I sell it I of course will repaint as necessary for appearance
but any buyer who thinks I will pay for total stripping etc can go
elsewhere.. I dont care who his mortgage lender is.
================ Can you turn off the HTML?======== Reply below===========
Jim,
You're talking a conventional loan, it has nothing to do with a FHA/VA
loan. You have no knowledge of a FHA loan, the more you try to explain
away, the more you show, you know nothing about FHA.
sa...@dog.com
Actually, all he has to do is... NOTHING.
The house has failed the buyer's inspection. The seller has NO
obligation to make it pass. If the contract stipulated that the house
must pass the inspection fopr the deal to be completed, then guess
what? Game, set, match.
sa...@dog.com
Lead [aint in houses is mitigated by painting over it. I have never
heard of anybody removing it, except when remodeling interior spaces.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:890485toovo9turdq...@4ax.com...
FHA is nothing like a selling conventional or even _as is_. When you
_agree_ to sell FHA, you must meet their regulations, not yours. In fact,
you can't sell FHA _as is_. That is part of the selling procedure.
Big Jim
is. NO lender, buyer etc can force anyone to make major repairs.
They can deny the loan but that's it.
On Aug 11, 8:08 pm, "Oscar" <n...@invalid.net> wrote:
> <sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
>
> news:890485toovo9turdq...@4ax.com...
>
Big Jim
EVERYONE would go with a FHA loan. I could express interest in a shack
that costs $50k . According to you the seller would have to replace
the foundation, HVAC, electricals, roofing, interior, painting etc at
their expense. I would get a new house for $50k.and the seller would
make $0 and possibly owe money fixing up the house.
Not likely. You got suckered so listen and learn so it doesnt happen
again. I bet you were too cheap to pay a lawyer . In most states
used homes are sold AS IS. It is the buyer's responsibility to inspect
a property and then work with the seller to close the deal. The seller
can fix all, some or none of the deficiencies. Of course a seller will
fix crucial items as the next buyer will see the same problem.
On Aug 11, 8:08 pm, "Oscar" <n...@invalid.net> wrote:
> <sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
>
> news:890485toovo9turdq...@4ax.com...
>
aemeijers
hiring a real estate lawyer when I bought this place. He said not to
bother- in MI they use boilerplate contracts when you buy through a
realtor and title company, and They Will Not Change Them. Legal term is
'take it or leave it'. Private-party sales, of course, would be different.
My deal was as vanilla as it gets, so I didn't bother to explore other
alternatives, and it all sailed through in days.
--
aem sends...
dpb
> "dpb" <no...@non.net> wrote in message
> news:h5slto$4v3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Afaict there is no contract w/ the seller at this point...he apparently
>> has an offer but that's no contract...
>
>
> You missed the OP original statement. "We are selling a house to a buyer
> using an FHA mortgage."
> FHA just doesn't go around inspecting houses, because someone is thinking
> about buying this one or that one. There must be an offer & acceptance.
Obviously there's an offer; apparently OP is satisfied w/ the pricing as
he made some attempts to satisfy the conditions of an (pretty obviously
contingent) inspection but that still doesn't lead to there actually
being any contract yet in place. There's an existing document that
could conceivably turn _INTO_ a contract, but it ain't one at this point.
For example, seller (OP) could instead of continuing the aforementioned
charade simply make a counter offer of something like $X for buyer to
accept w/ the existing report. Ball is then in buyer's court and
negotiations can continue from there or one party says "no mas" and
retires from the battle. In OP's shoes unless I were _truly_desperate_
for the sale I'd probably simply say "as is w/ report noted" but with
attached statement regarding whatever is own interpretation of the
particular situation (in this case the Pb paint issue) if didn't think
the inspection report accurate or as in this case overblowing the
seriousness of a finding ending in, in essence, "take it or leave it"
and let them decide how badly they want the house. Most folks by the
time they actually make an offer are emotionally committed and they'll
concede the small stuff.
> Thing is, FHA goes in after the acceptance, at least they did in my case.
> The way the OP sounds, they're doing it the same way to them.
As the previous quote from the FHA says, they don't do inspections at
all; it's your job (or the lender's to see you do yours). Thus it's
really whatever _the_lender_ requires rather than FHA--FHA doesn't
really care, specifically. That was what was when last dealt w/ one;
the verbiage at www.fha.gov doesn't read any different in quick look-see
on that point than did 30 years ago. The problem is that to meet the
other requirements for qualifying for the insurance they have to show in
essence extreme diligence so their (the lender's, that is) requirements
are more stringent than for a conventional mortgage.
In short, afaict from a quick perusal of the FHA site, whatever is this
hangup has more to do w/ the lender's procedures w/ FHA mortgages than
it does w/ FHA per se. That may seem like a minor difference but it's
significant.
--
Oscar
Oscar got taken and is angry that not everyone is as clueless as he
is. NO lender, buyer etc can force anyone to make major repairs.
They can deny the loan but that's it.
======Still haven't found the HTML button eh?======= Answer below
Well Jim, Here is an addendum, the seller _must sign_ when selling FHA
(all states have the addendum). I do notice they have areas now, where the
seller can put a cap on the $$ amounts to bring it up to FHA minimum
standards.
Just so you know, when you sign a contract, you have contractual
obligations. You appear to be the type, which would want to shrug them off.
That's when the buyer takes you to court.
Now, how's the crow taste? BTW, there's no charge for teaching you a
lesson.
http://realestate.utah.gov/REForms/New_FHA-VA_addendum.pdf
Oscar
You are the clueless one who must have got suckered. Otherwise
EVERYONE would go with a FHA loan. I could express interest in a shack
that costs $50k . According to you the seller would have to replace
the foundation, HVAC, electricals, roofing, interior, painting etc at
their expense. I would get a new house for $50k.and the seller would
make $0 and possibly owe money fixing up the house.
Not likely. You got suckered so listen and learn so it doesnt happen
again. I bet you were too cheap to pay a lawyer . In most states
used homes are sold AS IS. It is the buyer's responsibility to inspect
a property and then work with the seller to close the deal. The seller
can fix all, some or none of the deficiencies. Of course a seller will
fix crucial items as the next buyer will see the same problem.
======= Turn off your HTML==========
Wow, you just don't get it. Read my link, better yet, have someone read it
to you, and explain it. Maybe, just maybe you will be able to comprehend.
I really don't think you are competent enough to handle your own affairs.
Ed Pawlowski
"rile" <ril...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
In
fact, on his last inspection after doing everything we could see, he
specified he wanted nobody at the premises when he was there.
*******************************************************
That sounds suspicious. I'd contact a supervisor or whatever agency he
works for. Maybe he is looking for that envelope hidden someplace, the
one with the pictures of Ben Franklin inside.
Oscar
> Oscar wrote:
>> "dpb" <no...@non.net> wrote in message
>> news:h5slto$4v3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>>> Afaict there is no contract w/ the seller at this point...he apparently
>>> has an offer but that's no contract...
>>
>>
>> You missed the OP original statement. "We are selling a house to a
>> buyer using an FHA mortgage."
>> FHA just doesn't go around inspecting houses, because someone is
>> thinking about buying this one or that one. There must be an offer &
>> acceptance.
>
> Obviously there's an offer; apparently OP is satisfied w/ the pricing as
> he made some attempts to satisfy the conditions of an (pretty obviously
> contingent) inspection but that still doesn't lead to there actually
> being any contract yet in place. There's an existing document that could
> conceivably turn _INTO_ a contract, but it ain't one at this point.
Every state has this addendum. The seller _must_ sign it b/4 selling FHA. I
do notice, they have where the seller can put a $$ amount in, in order to
cap off meeting FHA minimum standards.
http://realestate.utah.gov/REForms/New_FHA-VA_addendum.pdf
Oh, but you are wrong, it is a contract. Stating there's not one now, the
seller would have to be a lunatic to go through what they are going
through, just because someone is interested? Surely you're smarter than
that.
Oscar
> Oscar wrote:
>> "dpb" <no...@non.net> wrote in message
>> news:h5slto$4v3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> As the previous quote from the FHA says, they don't do inspections at
> all; it's your job (or the lender's to see you do yours). Thus it's
> really whatever _the_lender_ requires rather than FHA--FHA doesn't really
> care, specifically. That was what was when last dealt w/ one; the
> verbiage at www.fha.gov doesn't read any different in quick look-see on
> that point than did 30 years ago. The problem is that to meet the other
> requirements for qualifying for the insurance they have to show in
> essence extreme diligence so their (the lender's, that is) requirements
> are more stringent than for a conventional mortgage.
Snipped this, and really didn't want to.
You're absolutely right, if I said somewhere FHA does inspections, it's not
a regular home inspection. Their inspection is from the appraiser, to make
sure it meets FHA minimum standards.
Oscar
<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ho5485p6uojjr3ohf...@4ax.com...
> tell the buyer this house will not ever pass FHA inspection it seems
> and be gone.
No, the seller has obligations, which they are contractually bound by. I
see they do have places now, for the seller to cap off the $$ amount for
certain standards. This does not relieve them from their contractual
obligations. Since they now have $$ amount caps. I would say you're right,
once the contractual obligation is fulfilled.
Every state has this addendum, which _must_ be signed by both parties, in
order to go FHA.
http://realestate.utah.gov/REForms/New_FHA-VA_addendum.pdf
Big Jim
means house sold "as-is". They can't force you to spend anything.
The last line has the option to reject the addendum. Seller simply
signs that and house is still sold "as-is". Lender and/or buyer can
walk away but seller is under no obligation to fix anything. See you
learned something today. If I were selling my home right now and that
sheet came in front of me I'd write $0 for repairs and sign the
rejection option.if a number was written in there I didnt like. .
Pest inspection is standard for seller so that is no biggie.
So aren't you wiser now. MAybe next time you sell a house you'll get
a lawyer and not get ripped.
On Aug 11, 9:20 pm, "Oscar" <n...@invalid.net> wrote:
> "Big Jim" <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Oscar
Yes it says seller will pay _____ . Seller can write in $0. That
means house sold "as-is". They can't force you to spend anything.
The last line has the option to reject the addendum. Seller simply
signs that and house is still sold "as-is". Lender and/or buyer can
walk away but seller is under no obligation to fix anything. See you
learned something today. If I were selling my home right now and that
sheet came in front of me I'd write $0 for repairs and sign the
rejection option.if a number was written in there I didnt like. .
Pest inspection is standard for seller so that is no biggie.
So aren't you wiser now. MAybe next time you sell a house you'll get
a lawyer and not get ripped.
========Turn off your HTML=======
Goodness Jim, I don't like to name call, but you're a simpleton.
The OP is doing this work, because obviously they filled in a $$ amount.
If you reject selling FHA, that's no biggie. We ARE talking about the OP's
case, exactly what is over your head here?
Look, if you say your willing to sell FHA, then reject it, you won't sell
FHA. Didn't I tell you b/4, you either do, or don't?
You can't sell FHA as is, you must meet their minimum standards. What don't
you understand about this?
You can't even figure out how to post, LOL, and here you are trying to tell
someone how to sell FHA. You definately made my night! LOL, thank you!
Doug Miller
>
>========Turn off your HTML=======
>
Jim isn't posting in HTML, Oscar -- if he were, I'd see the tags, because my
newsreader doesn't render HTML. If you're seeing what you think is HTML in
Jim's posts, it's because of a configuration problem on *your* computer, not
his.
Big Jim
being jerked around by an inspector. I agree there should be no
complaint if he signed that form and there is a dollar amount in that
blank. I'm sorry you got ripped off . You just cant understand that
other than C.O . and temites a seller really has no legal obligation
to fix anything. The buyer and lender are free to walk. FHA, DOT,
BBC, NYC, TNT, DDT whoever cannot force anyone to fix anything unless
it is agreed to in a contract.
On Aug 11, 9:53 pm, "Oscar" <n...@invalid.net> wrote:
> "Big Jim" <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
PatM
> We are selling a house to a buyer using an FHA mortgage. There is a
> rule, because of lead paint, that any house built before 1978 cannot
> have any "peeling, checking or flaking paint". The property has no
> lead paint....all buildings have been repainted since the late 80's.
> scraped, power washed, scraped again, and painted. They guy has come
> back two more times and still rejected it. All he does is walk around,
> take pictures and make a recommendation. He doesn't touch the paint,
> scrape it or anything. All of the paint is tight. The worst is, the
> buyers don't want us to do the painting...they want to repaint it a
> different color.
> Any ideas....we are at the ends of our wits.
Your problem varies, depending on the state you are in. Some license
lead inspectors and others don't. Until recently, one required
licensed inspectors but didn't have an inspection licensing process in
place and couldn't issue licenses but did accept licenses from other
states (go figure).
In general, licensing has a couple of levels: one being a sampling
technician and the other being a risk assessor. There are also
clearance techs but that's an unlikely cred for someone doing an
inspection.
So here are your issues: First, the house was scraped and painted in
the 1980s. Fine. But it's unlikely that you used interim controls
and there is probably lead in the soil. If he identified that on his
first visit and doesn't see any changes when he returns, he'll fail
you before he gets out of the car. That's issue #1. BTW, visible
paint chips on the ground is an immediate failure.
Any chipping paint on "mouthable surfaces" is an immediate failure,
but "chipping" has a wide definition. It can also be any wear on
friction surfaces such as hallways or stairs. Alligatoring is also a
no-no. Therefore, windows are your biggest problem.
Your best bet might be to get your own risk assessment. That'll run
you $500 to $1000, depending on where you live. Then you have a
baseline. It also means that if there is lead poisoning later, you
have some baseline documentation of the risk.
As for comments about all paint must be removed, etc. That is wrong.
In almost all situation, interim controls are fine and abatement would
be very rare. Groups I work with rehab 300 to 400 homes a year using
Federal money and there hasn't been a single abatement job that I know
of.
As for what he's looking at, I believe (but am not entirely sure) that
you have a legal right to a risk assessment and/or lead paint report
done on your premise.
BTW, once you have knowledge of LBP (whether is it there or not), you
are legally required to report that information to all tenants and all
buyers. So if you know you removed lead in the 1980s, you're required
to tell them that.
Oscar
"Doug Miller" <spam...@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:h5t8vu$e2k$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
You're right, I owe an apology.
Oscar
If there was a number the OP did not mention. It sounds as if he is
being jerked around by an inspector. I agree there should be no
complaint if he signed that form and there is a dollar amount in that
blank. I'm sorry you got ripped off . You just cant understand that
other than C.O . and temites a seller really has no legal obligation
to fix anything. The buyer and lender are free to walk. FHA, DOT,
BBC, NYC, TNT, DDT whoever cannot force anyone to fix anything unless
it is agreed to in a contract.
================ reply below==========
I owe you an apology, accusing you for posting in HTML. Thanks to Doug for
pointing it out.
Sorry Jim! I got carried away. But, I'm still LOL, guess the LOL is on me.
Have at it!
Back to about the obligation. If someone wants to sell FHA, and can't meet
FHA minimum standards, then they're not going to sell FHA. They wasted
everyone's time. Just say upfront, no FHA/VA. There's no reason to play
games.
sa...@dog.com
Are you drunk? If you agree to sell to someone who is financing
through FHA, you are NOT agreeing to do a damned thing except complete
the sale IF the house passes inspection and you comply with FHA
guidelines. You are under NO obligation to fix anything. If your house
fails to meet their stipulations, you can just shrug your shoulders
and walk away from the deal.
sa...@dog.com
Nothing in that addendum legally compels the seller to fix anything
unless he wants to complete the sale. If the seller wants out, all he
has to do is... NOTHING. He cannot be forced to fix so much as a
dripping faucet if he decides he doesn't want to complete the sale.
Big Jim
seller or one during a boom may choose not to fix anything. The buyer
and/or lender may walk away but the seller is never under obligation
to fix anything unless he/she agrees to or there is a C.O. involved or
other local regulation such as well testing etc. Oscar doesnt seem to
realize that in most states used houses are sold as-is . It is up to
the buyer to inspect and request repairs. Oscar got
ripped off and can't believe that there are people who are wiser than
him.
On Aug 12, 6:39 am, sa...@dog.com wrote:
>
> Nothing in that addendum legally compels the seller to fix anything
> unless he wants to complete the sale. If the seller wants out, all he
> has to do is... NOTHING. He cannot be forced to fix so much as a
> dripping faucet if he decides he doesn't want to complete the sale.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Robert Neville
>Can't address the FHA part, but here in MI, I asked a lawyer buddy about
>hiring a real estate lawyer when I bought this place. He said not to
>bother- in MI they use boilerplate contracts when you buy through a
>realtor and title company, and They Will Not Change Them. Legal term is
>'take it or leave it'. Private-party sales, of course, would be different.
Yep. Use of a lawyer in residential real estate transactions is definitely a
regional thing. Common in New England and a few other places.
dpb
...
> Every state has this addendum. The seller _must_ sign it b/4 selling FHA. I
> do notice, they have where the seller can put a $$ amount in, in order to
> cap off meeting FHA minimum standards.
> http://realestate.utah.gov/REForms/New_FHA-VA_addendum.pdf
>
> Oh, but you are wrong, it is a contract. Stating there's not one now, the
> seller would have to be a lunatic to go through what they are going
> through, just because someone is interested? Surely you're smarter than
> that.
It begins life as an addendum to a contract _OFFER_; it doesn't comprise
an enforceable _contract_ until executed by both parties.
Not only does it have the provision for limitation of cost of repair to
seller, look at the bottom--there's even a provision for counteroffer
from seller.
Again the reason for having counsel before jumpin' in--they know the
groundrules under which the game is played so to protect yourself from
inadvertently committing oneself to a sizable problem. And, of course,
they solve the COI problem of not having an agent actually representing
your own interests.
--
Ralph Mowery
"Robert Neville" <do...@bother.com> wrote in message
news:pqe585p9us31qthd7...@4ax.com...
Maybe it is. When I was buying and selling a couple of houses about 5 years
ago in NC I was told I had to have a lawyer to complete the deal. I even
had 'cash' money and still could not buy a house without the lawyer.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:2r658555tsjhi75j0...@4ax.com...
Good grief, now I have to explain what an addendum is. No, I won't be a
teacher here. Read the top, let it soak in. Then read the entire addendum,
not what you just want to read. Maybe pay particular attention to item 6,
now you have to know what REPC is, well I do, and you apparently do not.
The didn't start fixing stuff on their own, obviously after going through
offers/counter offers, then acceptance, they started their painting.
Oscar
You do not know what an addendum is. Good grief, its in addition to a
contract offer.
I understand offers/counter offers, apparently you don't. The OP started
doing the work, not out of the kindness of their heart, but because at some
point there was an offer & acceptance. For some reason, you overlook of why
they are doing the work.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:dd6585lk4sq4qitjk...@4ax.com...
The OP isn't fixing stuff out of the kindness of their heart. It's obvious
their was an offer & acceptance at some point. They have obligations to
fulfill, which they are attempting.
Walk away? I'm sure they can, and be prepared to go to court for breaching
a contract.
dpb
I most certainly _do_ know what an addendum is...and, in fact, that's
what I explicitly said. Again, there was an offer; there's not a
contract of which this addendum is a part _until_ there are valid
signatories.
> I understand offers/counter offers, apparently you don't. The OP started
> doing the work, not out of the kindness of their heart, but because at some
> point there was an offer & acceptance. For some reason, you overlook of why
> they are doing the work.
We (at least I) don't know that for certain--it was never stated
explicitly or if it was I didn't see any statement to that fact.
_IF_ (the proverbial big if) OP did sign an essentially open-ended
contract then he can only reap what he has sown and his best option is
again to get guidance from somebody on his own nickel to help in
demonstrating that the supposed defect has been adequately taken care of.
--
Smitty Two
"Oscar" <no...@invalid.net> wrote:
I don't know shit about FHA, haven't read the links, and don't want to,
but until someone says why the seller can't just *walk away from the
sale,* I'm going to have to side with the salted dog here.
Did the seller actually sign something that says he *WILL* fix the paint
issue, or did he only sign something that says he *WILL* fix the paint
issue *IF* he wants the sale to close? There's a world of difference
between the two.
tra...@optonline.net
> "Big Jim" <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> > Their lawyer would have seen that during attorney review and killed the
> > deal ASAP. If I
> >were the homeowner, my lawyer would be earning his pay and I certainly
> >wouldnt get jerked around by what seems to be a fishy sounding
> >inspection process.
>
> You really don't have a clue. When you enter into a contract to sell
> FHA/VA, your laywer can't make exceptions. You either sell FHA/VA, or you
> don't, it's that simple.
>
> I suggest you don't reply to threads, to which you have no knowledge. The
> more you reply, the bigger idiot you become.
Even a sales contract with FHA financing almost certainly has a limit
to the dollar amount of repairs that a seller is obligated to make.
And certainly every contract SHOULD have such a clause. The seller
should check his contract, read it and see what it says. If he gets
an expensive quote to remedy the paint situation that's over the
limit, he has an out.
It's simply not the case that if you have an FHA buyer the seller is
on the hook to fix anything and everything just because some FHA
inspector requires.
Also, from a practical standpoint, if he offers to return the sellers
deposit in full and call it quits, there is a good chance the seller
will walk. Their alternative, to suit for specific performance,
while their deposit money is sitting in escrow, is not a particularly
good option.
tra...@optonline.net
> Oscar wrote:
> > "dpb" <n...@non.net> wrote in message
> >news:h5slto$4v3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> >> Afaict there is no contract w/ the seller at this point...he apparently
> >> has an offer but that's no contract...
>
> > You missed the OP original statement. "We are selling a house to a buyer
> > using an FHA mortgage."
> > FHA just doesn't go around inspecting houses, because someone is thinking
> > about buying this one or that one. There must be an offer & acceptance.
>
> Obviously there's an offer; apparently OP is satisfied w/ the pricing as
> he made some attempts to satisfy the conditions of an (pretty obviously
> contingent) inspection but that still doesn't lead to there actually
> being any contract yet in place. There's an existing document that
> could conceivably turn _INTO_ a contract, but it ain't one at this point.
Of course there is a contract in place. I've yet to see a bank/
mortgage company involved with inspections on a property without
having a purchase contract. That is the most basic requirement as
part of the whole mortgage process. They want a contract that shows
what the property is, what the purchase price is, how much is being
financed, how much is being put down, etc. together with the
application fee. Only then do they send out any appraisers/
inspectors.
And also, any buyer would be an idiot to pay a mortgage application
fee, home inspection fees, attorneys fees, etc without having a
contract. He could spend that money and then have the seller say:
"Never mind, I found another buyer at a higher price."
>
> For example, seller (OP) could instead of continuing the aforementioned
> charade simply make a counter offer of something like $X for buyer to
> accept w/ the existing report. Ball is then in buyer's court and
> negotiations can continue from there or one party says "no mas" and
> retires from the battle. In OP's shoes unless I were _truly_desperate_
> for the sale I'd probably simply say "as is w/ report noted" but with
> attached statement regarding whatever is own interpretation of the
> particular situation (in this case the Pb paint issue) if didn't think
> the inspection report accurate or as in this case overblowing the
> seriousness of a finding ending in, in essence, "take it or leave it"
> and let them decide how badly they want the house. Most folks by the
> time they actually make an offer are emotionally committed and they'll
> concede the small stuff.
>
> > Thing is, FHA goes in after the acceptance, at least they did in my case.
> > The way the OP sounds, they're doing it the same way to them.
>
> As the previous quote from the FHA says, they don't do inspections at
> all; it's your job (or the lender's to see you do yours). Thus it's
> really whatever _the_lender_ requires rather than FHA--FHA doesn't
> really care, specifically. That was what was when last dealt w/ one;
> the verbiage atwww.fha.govdoesn't read any different in quick look-see
> on that point than did 30 years ago. The problem is that to meet the
> other requirements for qualifying for the insurance they have to show in
> essence extreme diligence so their (the lender's, that is) requirements
> are more stringent than for a conventional mortgage.
>
> In short, afaict from a quick perusal of the FHA site, whatever is this
> hangup has more to do w/ the lender's procedures w/ FHA mortgages than
> it does w/ FHA per se. That may seem like a minor difference but it's
> significant.
>
> --
tra...@optonline.net
From experience in how the sales process works, it is very reasonable
to conclude that there is a 99% chance that a contract does in fact
exist. A mortgage company/bank does not send out appraisers,
inspectors or anyone else without a completed mortgage application and
any required fees. A most basic part of that mortgage application is
a COPY OF THE EXECUTED PURCHASE CONTRACT. The fact that the FHA
inspector is there almost surely guarantees that the contract is in
place.
To do otherwise, they would be wasting time and money ghosts half the
time. And the buyer would have to be an idiot to start wasting time
filling out mortgage applications, usually incurring fees to do so,
hiring inspectors, etc without a contract.
tra...@optonline.net
> "Big Jim" <bigjimp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> Here in NJ you are considered a fool to buy/sell real estate without
> an attorney. I don't know where you are at but here's how it works in
> NJ. 1.Seller places home for sale at a price. 2. Buyer likes house ,
> makes offer. 3. If offer is reasonable, contracts are drawn up with
> estimated closing date, guarantee of C.O. if necessary , buyer agrees
> to secure funding, buyer can inspect home and reject for defects and
> so forth. 4.Attorneys review contract make changes if necessary. 5.
> Buyer pays for inspections . 6. List of deficiencies is presented to
> seller. 7. Seller agrees to fix some or allof them. 8. Buyer agrees
> or walks away. 9. On closing day money changes hands and papers are
> signed.. Of course the lender can reject a home with major defects
> and therefore buyer cant buy and deal is dead. Just because you got
> played doesnt mean everyone is like you. I've sold and bought several
> houses. I've rejected buyers for wanting too much and walked away as a
> buyer when seller wouldn't fix things. . My current home is 1935
> vintage. Sure there may be some lead paint under layers of latex.
> When I sell it I of course will repaint as necessary for appearance
> but any buyer who thinks I will pay for total stripping etc can go
> elsewhere.. I dont care who his mortgage lender is.
>
> ================ Can you turn off the HTML?======== Reply below===========
>
> Jim,
>
> You're talking a conventional loan, it has nothing to do with a FHA/VA
> loan. You have no knowledge of a FHA loan, the more you try to explain
> away, the more you show, you know nothing about FHA.
Here's a link to an example of an FHA purchase contract from the web:
Look at line 81 where section 8 begins. There is a check box for (a)
which requires the seller to deliver certain parts of the home in
normal working condition. Then look at line 116, where there is a
check box for the alternative (b), As Is - Property shall be conveyed
"As Is", with no warranty whatsoever as to property condition
So, clearly this example of an FHA contract has provisions for
selecting (b) and selling as is. If as is were not an option, why
is it right there in the boilerplate?
Red Green
> What if the alleged problem can't reasonably be fixed? Does the seller
> go to jail? I don't think so!
Well, they could make him watch Oprah until he does.
>
> The OP's problem can't be fixed because the inspector refuses to tell
> him what needs fixing until an envelope with cash is left where
> instructed.
>
> The seller can simply refuse to go along with requests made by the
> buyer.
>
> So far, the initial inspection said the paint had to be sealed. That
> was done and now the inspector still won't pass it. I'd say that means
> the seller made a good faith effort, and that can easily be the end of
> the deal without any repercussions.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Oscar
"Smitty Two" <prest...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:prestwhich-17A05...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com...
> I don't know shit about FHA, haven't read the links, and don't want to,
> but until someone says why the seller can't just *walk away from the
> sale,* I'm going to have to side with the salted dog here.
>
> Did the seller actually sign something that says he *WILL* fix the paint
> issue, or did he only sign something that says he *WILL* fix the paint
> issue *IF* he wants the sale to close? There's a world of difference
> between the two.
It's called breach of contract. If you read the OP, you will see they are
not fixing anything out of the kindness of their heart. Everything you want
to know has been addressed in other responses.
Reading is knowledge.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:dg1685lb66r7n724t...@4ax.com...
> go to jail? I don't think so!
>
> him what needs fixing until an envelope with cash is left where
> instructed.
>
> The seller can simply refuse to go along with requests made by the
> buyer.
>
> So far, the initial inspection said the paint had to be sealed. That
> was done and now the inspector still won't pass it. I'd say that means
> the seller made a good faith effort, and that can easily be the end of
> the deal without any repercussions.
You are not aware of breach of contract? Nobody said the seller is going to
jail. LOL. Good grief, what the heck are you smoking?
Oscar
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:2c3588a7-eaed-48ce...@e7g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
=======reply below=====
Someone with common sense. I don't why I wasted so much time, attempting to
explain common sense to some individuals, it won't happen.
Oscar
> I most certainly _do_ know what an addendum is...and, in fact, that's
> what I explicitly said. Again, there was an offer; there's not a
> contract of which this addendum is a part _until_ there are valid
> signatories.
Then you would know, the OP wouldn't be bitchin about what they _must_ do.
Use a little common sense here.
> We (at least I) don't know that for certain--it was never stated
> explicitly or if it was I didn't see any statement to that fact.
>
> _IF_ (the proverbial big if) OP did sign an essentially open-ended
> contract then he can only reap what he has sown and his best option is
> again to get guidance from somebody on his own nickel to help in
> demonstrating that the supposed defect has been adequately taken care of.
You _must_ agree to sell FHA, nobody can say, oh BTW, we're going FHA.
Hence, an agreement (contract) is in place.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:rbr5851r5kcf45igm...@4ax.com...
> to rectify whatever the inspector imagines is wrong. At that point
> they won't be breaching any contract. The agreement was that the sale
> would be consumated if ceratin conditions and stipulations were met
> and resolved.
LOL... nice try, but breaching a contract, is breaching a contract.
Oscar
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:73b9e0e4-5613-40ae...@r36g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
==============reply below=========
Nice catch. It used to be, FHA would not sell as is. This is good
information, to keep in the memory banks.
rile
> In article <fe7c7517-d1c1-44cb-95f9-e248ed94a...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, rile <ril...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >We are selling a house to a buyer using an FHA mortgage. There is a
> >rule, because of lead paint, that any house built before 1978 cannot
> >have any "peeling, checking or flaking paint". The property has no
> >lead paint....all buildings have been repainted since the late 80's.
>
> Very unlikely that the property "has no lead paint." It may have no *exposed*
> lead paint, but if it was built before 1978, it's very unlikely that it has
> none at all.
>
> >An inspector came out, rejected it for that reason. My son and I
> >scraped, power washed, scraped again, and painted. They guy has come
> >back two more times and still rejected it. All he does is walk around,
> >take pictures and make a recommendation. He doesn't touch the paint,
> >scrape it or anything. All of the paint is tight. The worst is, the
> >buyers don't want us to do the painting...they want to repaint it a
> >different color.
> >Any ideas....we are at the ends of our wits.
>
> Sounds to me as though the buyer may have changed his mind about buying the
> house, and is using the inspection as an excuse to back out of the
> transaction. Check the purchase agreement, preferably with the help of an
> attorney experienced in real estate law. Such contracts typically (in my
> state, at least) allow the buyer to unilaterally cancel the agreement if the
> inspection discloses a "major defect". In my opinion, lead paint that is not
> peeling, checking, or flaking is not a "major defect" -- but I am not a
> lawyer, which is why I suggested you should consult one. If you've hired a
> real estate agent to sell the home, the agency almost certainly has a lawyer
> on retainer, if not on staff, who would I'm sure be happy to explain to the
> buyer (or the buyer's lawyer) the difference between "major" and "minor"
> defects.
the buyers have NOT changed their minds. In fact, they are as
infuriated as we are. They are now trying to get a conventional
mortgage even though it will cost more.
Doug Miller
>
><sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
>> Nope. They can constructively walk away by not making any more efforts
>> to rectify whatever the inspector imagines is wrong. At that point
>> they won't be breaching any contract. The agreement was that the sale
>> would be consumated if ceratin conditions and stipulations were met
>> and resolved.
>
>LOL... nice try, but breaching a contract, is breaching a contract.
Oscar, I really wonder how carefully you have read the real estate contracts
you've been a party to in the past. A typical inspection clause allows the
buyer to cancel the contract if the inspection discloses major defects that
the seller refuses to fix. The seller is *not* required to fix *anything*
unless he has previously agreed to do so. If an inspection discloses major
defects, any of the following can happen:
(a) the buyer can waive the inspection contingency ("I don't care, I'll buy it
anyway");
(b) the buyer can cancel the deal ("Give me my deposit back, I'm outta here");
(c) the seller may offer to reduce the price of the home; the buyer is under
no obligation to agree (see (b) above);
(d) the seller may offer to repair the defects at the buyer's expense; the
buyer is under no obligation to agree (see (b) above);
(e) the seller may offer to repair the defects at the seller's expense, in
which case the *buyer* is probably breaching the contract if he refuses to
consummate the transaction;
(f) the buyer may ask the seller to reduce the price, or repair the defects at
the seller's expense; the seller is under no obligation to agree;
(g) the seller can tell the buyer to pound sand.
In the absence of a specific written agreement by the seller to make
repairs, under which of these scenarios is the seller breaching the contract
by refusing to do so?
Doug Miller
>
>the buyers have NOT changed their minds. In fact, they are as
>infuriated as we are.
Then what is the problem? You want to proceed with the sale, the buyers want
to proceed with the sale -- why can't the sale proceed? Do the buyers not know
they can waive an inspection contingency?
> They are now trying to get a conventional
>mortgage even though it will cost more.
Why?
Josh
wrote:
>In article <882aca25-dd75-48ef...@c14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, rile <ril...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>the buyers have NOT changed their minds. In fact, they are as
>>infuriated as we are.
>
>Then what is the problem? You want to proceed with the sale, the buyers want
>to proceed with the sale -- why can't the sale proceed? Do the buyers not know
>they can waive an inspection contingency?
This isn't the standard buyer's inspection -- the FHA mortgage can't
close without the approved inspection (similar to a conventional
mortgage not being able to close if the appraisal isn't high enough).
The buyers can't waive that (well, they can, but they then need to
find a non-FHA mortgage, which is what it sounds like they're doing)
sa...@dog.com
wrote:
OMG! I never even considered that!
sa...@dog.com
Sorry if I parted your hair in the middle. As I said, he can stop
trying to fix the bogus issues right now, and it will not be breach of
contract.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:lvb68556nr54ir2eo...@4ax.com...
You didn't part my hair. In fact, as soon as you started saying walk away,
I had you pegged. Your attitude of shrug your shoulders and walk away, is a
big part of what's wrong with this country today. You're the kind, which
don't want any part of responsibility, and the attitude is sue me, clog the
courts.
Glad your colors came out early.
Oscar
"Doug Miller" <spam...@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:h5v977$chh$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Doug,
This is FHA, not a typical conventional sell. Did you not notice?
Everything you have written, is pretty much a moot point.
An FHA appraiser does the inspection for FHA. FHA recommends getting your
own professional inspection.
You _must_ agree to sell FHA. This is _not_ done by the nod of the head, a
handshake, verbally, or any other method, except contract.
This thread would not even be here, with the OP bitchin about FHA, unless
they agreed to sell FHA.
Big Jim
taken like you did. You yourself provided evidence the seller can
limit his repair costs . So FHA FHA means nothing if a seller refuses
to fix things or sets a limit that doesnt fix everything. It's in the
contract as you say. The OP's buyers need to either get different
financing or report the inspector's strange behavior and lack of
specific remedies for supposed problems. If the seller has made an
effort he has fulfilled his obligation. We dont know exactly what he
agreed to do. It seems that FHA has similar appraisal/inspection
procedures that many lenders do. Anytime a buyer and seller cant
agree on price, repairs , closing date etc a deal dies.
On Aug 12, 6:05 pm, "Oscar" <n...@invalid.net> wrote:
>
> This is FHA, not a typical conventional sell. Did you not notice?
>
> Everything you have written, is pretty much a moot point.
>
> An FHA appraiser does the inspection for FHA. FHA recommends getting your
> own professional inspection.
>
> You _must_ agree to sell FHA. This is _not_ done by the nod of the head, a
> handshake, verbally, or any other method, except contract.
>
> This thread would not even be here, with the OP bitchin about FHA, unless
> they agreed to sell FHA.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oscar
"Big Jim" <bigji...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:37cb578d-7a4f-487e...@c34g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
You and this FHA, FHA. You're wrong and you;re angry not everyone gets
taken like you did. You yourself provided evidence the seller can
limit his repair costs . So FHA FHA means nothing if a seller refuses
to fix things or sets a limit that doesnt fix everything. It's in the
contract as you say. The OP's buyers need to either get different
financing or report the inspector's strange behavior and lack of
specific remedies for supposed problems. If the seller has made an
effort he has fulfilled his obligation. We dont know exactly what he
agreed to do. It seems that FHA has similar appraisal/inspection
procedures that many lenders do. Anytime a buyer and seller cant
agree on price, repairs , closing date etc a deal dies.
========= reply below========
Jim,
Exactly, I provided proof the seller is contractually bound to fulfill
their obligations.
If they fail to fulfill their obligations, they can't just walk away. I
don't care if they put $100 as a limit, and never spent it, they don't have
a right to walk away. They can, but then that's where lawyers come in for
breach of contract. The seller must exhaust their obligations.
You & saltydog are a big part of what's wrong with this country. You both
think you can just walk away from responsibilites.
sa...@dog.com
You become a bigger idiot (if that is possible) with every post.
Perhaps you should put down the shovel.
sa...@dog.com
You don't know a damned thing about either one of us, chump.
rile
The buyers cannot waive the inspection contingency. It is a
requirement for the mortgage they are seeking.
Big Jim
Responsibilities? I've bought and sold enough homes to know when a
buyer or seller is jerking my chain. It's better to bail on a deal
than get suckered. What happened to you and how were you taken?
Smitty Two
"Oscar" <no...@invalid.net> wrote:
> ==============reply below=========
Reply below? Is your newsreader broken, or did you learn quoting
technique from Stormy, or what?
Smitty Two
"Oscar" <no...@invalid.net> wrote:
I haven't seen what I want to know addressed. Can you link me to the
specific post that answers my specific question? Do you understand my
specific question?
Oscar
What's the matter, sore because I wouldn't hold your hand, telling you what
it's about? Wow, a bunch of sore heads.
Let's see how your reader quotes Google Groups
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:9eh6855c6gamjkvpa...@4ax.com...
Oh, I seemed to strike a nerve. Walk away, it's appears to be your forte.
Smitty Two
"Oscar" <no...@invalid.net> wrote:
We're still waiting - at least I am - for you to tell us just what the
fuck it is about agreeing to sell FHA that obligates the seller to
satisfy the whims of the inspector and consummate the sale? If you've
addressed that issue in one of your posts, I must've missed it. But
truth be told, I don't think you even understand the question.
Oscar
>Responsibilities? I've bought and sold enough homes to know when a
>buyer or seller is jerking my chain. It's better to bail on a deal
>than get suckered. What happened to you and how were you taken?
And now you're gonna tell me, you've done them all FHA, and walked away.
You're just being plain silly.
Oscar
> We're still waiting - at least I am - for you to tell us just what the
> fuck it is about agreeing to sell FHA that obligates the seller to
> satisfy the whims of the inspector and consummate the sale? If you've
> addressed that issue in one of your posts, I must've missed it. But
> truth be told, I don't think you even understand the question.
The "inspector" is actually a FHA appraiser.
It's obvious, the OP _agreed_ (signed a contract) to sell FHA, because
that's the only way you can sell FHA.
The OP has repeatedly attempted to satisfy FHA, they have never said how
many $$$ they agreed to spend to sell FHA. But, they're not painting out of
the kindness of their heart, they _had_ to agree to this (contract). They
must fulfill their contractual obligation, whether it be $100 or $5000.
Now read the addendum, I'm not copying/pasting for your convenience.
http://realestate.utah.gov/REForms/New_FHA-VA_addendum.pdf
BTW, I've addressed it more than once. There's been a couple other people
address it also, you must not be reading through the thread, or you have
them blocked.
sa...@dog.com
Careful there, Smitty. You keep this up and his head may explode. I'm
pretty sure it contains LEAD.
sa...@dog.com
Oscar is not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, Smitty. Unless
you can figure out a way to draw pictures with crayons on usenet, you
are not going to have much luck getting him to understand much of
anything.
Oscar
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:0pn685p483lbjhjda...@4ax.com...
LOL dog, you said I didn't know you. I know your kind well, as well as
everyone else knowing your kind. Not only do you shrug your shoulders & run
from your responsibilities, when you get shut down on Usenet, you throw a
tantrum. Seen it many times. LOL. Thanks for confirming.
Smitty Two
>
> Oscar is not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, Smitty. Unless
> you can figure out a way to draw pictures with crayons on usenet, you
> are not going to have much luck getting him to understand much of
> anything.
Well, maybe I'm the idiot. Oscar obviously knows something I don't, but
I'll be damned if I can get him to tell me what it is.
Oscar
I replied to you elsewhere, are you having a hard time following? Don't
much matter now, the OP has started a new thread, saying it wasn't FHA.
For the sake of replying, here it is again.
The "inspector" is actually a FHA appraiser.
It's obvious, the OP _agreed_ (signed a contract) to sell FHA, because
that's the only way you can sell FHA.
The OP has repeatedly attempted to satisfy FHA, they have never said how
many $$$ they agreed to spend to sell FHA. But, they're not painting out of