[quote=SD Realtor]Tell us all, since you have been licensed so long, when exactly was your last transaction? In fact when was your last short sale?[/quote]
My last “transaction” was in late 2002. My last “short sale” was in 1993. It took approx 153 days to close. Even with the thousands of bureaucratic know-nothing paper pushers that “big banks” have hired today (with their “govm’t bailout money”) to administer “borrower assistance” programs and the extra HUD and CAR form(s) more recently invented for “short sales,” I’m not hearing that these transactions close much, if ANY sooner than they did in ’92 – ’93. Buyers DID submit earnest $$ checks with their offers to purchase and they WERE deposited into escrow back then. However, the “short” that lenders were asked to take in ’93 was relatively small compared to what they are typically asked to accept today.
[quote=SDRealtor]. . . The entire premise of your rants have been that buyers spend lots of money before they find out about liens. This is a blatant falsehood. All I am asserting is that what you are saying is not true. The court case is fine and I hope that agent gets what is coming to them.
I am attacking you for making statements about buyers putting out alot of money before being able to find out liens in a short sale.[/quote]
SDR, WHERE have I stated here that “buyers” are “putting out alot of money?” Am I missing something?? Sure, I have no doubt that current “buyers” and their agents are wasting their time on short sales that never materialize when they COULD be engaged in a sale transaction that the seller has the power to close. I don’t think that the “convenience factor” amounts to “damages” however. In Holmes, above, I “assumed” the Holmeses deposited earnest money because the property was not marketed as a “short sale.” Presumably, escrow was opened a “regular” or “traditional” sale. The Holmeses did not learn their escrow was to be a “short-sale” until well into it. Perhaps, in an effort to provide some sort of “headnote” (when one didn’t yet exist), I improperly stated that the Holmeses “lost their earnest $$.” In fact, the opinion is not clear as to how much, if any, earnest money they deposited and when (or if) they received a refund. Unless we go up to the OC and watch the trial, we will never know. (If ReMax/Summer were smart, they’d settle this thing in a dark conference room, fast and put it behind them, lol.) For this “assumption,” it appears I may have “jumped the gun” here and apologize. In my experience, buyers who terminated escrows engaged in arbitration with the seller when they believed they should have received a refund of 100% of their earnest money deposit and did not.
Do any Piggs have access to Westlaw/Lexis? If so, can you post the headnote describing the “holding” of Holmes v Summer (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 1510. Thanks for any contribution.
[quote=SDRealtor]Just because an escrow is opened doesn’t mean a thing. The buyer does not have to spend a penny. Contingencies have not started in a short sale until written approval is obtained from the lender/lenders involved. Everything can be found out (and usually is found out) weeks and even months before the approval is completed.[/quote]
This is entirely the point of this thread and my point as well. Many sellers and their agents today are taking escrow “too lightly,” often due to recalcitrant lenders whom they are “hopeful” will take voluntary “haircuts” at some point in the near future.
10+ years ago, when each purchase offer packet of CAR forms (legal size, in NCR quadruplicate) was $7.50, as agents, we didn’t waste time and money making a bunch of “random offers” at once to see if they stick and then tell our clients to keep looking while they are presumably “in escrow.” Being “in escrow” meant you were in contract to purchase property. The “shopping” was over. Your earnest money check was deposited. Sellers/buyers had a duty to perform.
I know that CAR forms, including the purchase offer, counter offer and the Exclusive Authorization and Right to Sell packet are in software pkgs now, because I am a subscriber. I know an agent can just type in the blanks and submit offers randomly, at no cost. I know they can now transmit these offers electronically. I know that original signatures are no longer needed right away. I know agents don’t have to visit mail drops around town at 10:00 pm to submit offers anymore. I am aware that current buyers don’t post an earnest $$ money deposit on short sales (and then listing agents complain they walk too much, lol). What do they expect?? Are all these machinations a “streamlined” way to do business today or does it invite “breach” and “walking?” Does the current “system” work, SDR??
[quote=SD Realtor]Your assertions that buyers are putting out money because they cannot find out this information are false. You are telling a lie. Your other allegations about short sales falling through because of your litany of judgements and other reasons… well I will ask you AGAIN…you said you were going to talk to realtors and find out about how many transactions this occurred in? Well? I am still waiting.[/quote]
I’m still working on this and will post what I learn here on this thread.
[quote=SDRealtor]I am not taking anything personally. I am one of a few people who can call you out on this. The bottom line is you know deep down that buyers can find out all of this information and instead of saying, “yes buyers can find out about this” you would rather do anything you can to not say that.[/quote]
Yes, a buyer can find out about liens prior to making an offer IF the seller’s name is not too common, IF they have proper middle initials and IF they have other personal info about the seller at their disposal to assist them (esp if the seller has a common name) and IF they or their agent know how to properly search the title at the recorder’s office or thru a subscription service. Many buyers and agents don’t. This “talent” (and it is a talent, btw), is not required to be an agent or even a broker in CA. That is why we have title companies. If buyers knew of the liens in advance they could structure their offers as to those liens and demand that they be cured/removed as a condition of sale. This IS easier to do for a buyer now that the last 29 years of ARCC records are available online. This didn’t used to be the case. Microfilm and cloth binders, anyone?? Got an extra week to “train?” If so, break out the running shoes.
However, here in SD County, ARCC doesn’t tell the WHOLE story about a delinquent seller. Sellers who are behind in their mtg payments quite often have other problems with debt. They (and non-property owners) are often sued and never respond. Unbeknownst to these seller-defendants, these collectors get default judgments against them, sometimes to the tune of several per day per courthouse. When defendant-debtors are mailed the entry of judgment by the clerk, they often don’t know what it is so they bring it to someone like me and ask. They often have no $$ to pay them, anyway. These creditors have to wait to get their judgment entered. Then they have to wait a longer period to get an abstract issued. While they are waiting, they are often trying to work out a payment plan with the judgment debtor, sometimes discounting the debt. All of this may be going on in the “back room” simultaneous to these sellers’ short-sale escrow with bona-fide buyers. These debts would NOT show up on a PR as “encumbrances to real property” but could scotch a deal at the 11th hour if the seller is uncooperative with their judgment creditors and/or the short-sale escrow drags on long enough. When a judgment creditor becomes pissed and/or loses contact with the judgment debtor, they file their already-issued abstract with no further ado, as is their right. They may or may not know that the debtor’s property is in escrow, they may not care and it doesn’t matter. This “deadbeat” seller may not understand that this judgment creditor has the power to shut their escrow down. They may not have even told their listing agent about the debt.
In light of the current market, I feel today’s buyer’s motto should be, “When a seller can no longer make their payments and want a buyer to `rescue’ them from foreclosure via a `short sale,’ DIG DEEPER.”
It COULD be a “race against time” with some of these “short sale” sellers to close before more “creditors” enter the mix.
SDR, as a buyer, would YOU want to enter a “short-sale” transaction without knowing everything possible about the seller relative to the current or future marketability of their title?? I certainly wouldn’t.
