ethical question; short sales

[scaredyclassic]

well, what if i track it (if I’m not accepted) and find the bank took a lower offer of equal strength. If i sue the agent, i suppose I’d have to prove the sale of the personal effects drove the decision on which offer to accept. This makes me angry. now I’m thinking I should have offered much less, but offered a large dollar amount for seller’s used stuff. probably would be much stronger of an offer. I feel like a doofus.

[davelj]

[quote=walterwhite]well, what if i track it (if I’m not accepted) and find the bank took a lower offer of equal strength. If i sue the agent, i suppose I’d have to prove the sale of the personal effects drove the decision on which offer to accept. This makes me angry. now I’m thinking I should have offered much less, but offered a large dollar amount for seller’s used stuff. probably would be much stronger of an offer. I feel like a doofus.[/quote]

Realistically, you won’t be able to “sue the agent.” The best you could do would be to contact both the lender and whatever the CA real estate licensing agency is and try to get the agent in trouble. And my guess is at the end of the day nothing would be done by either party because they’re overloaded. You’d probably be wasting your time.

[davelj]

[quote=walterwhite]well, what if i track it (if I’m not accepted) and find the bank took a lower offer of equal strength. If i sue the agent, i suppose I’d have to prove the sale of the personal effects drove the decision on which offer to accept. This makes me angry. now I’m thinking I should have offered much less, but offered a large dollar amount for seller’s used stuff. probably would be much stronger of an offer. I feel like a doofus.[/quote]

Realistically, you won’t be able to “sue the agent.” The best you could do would be to contact both the lender and whatever the CA real estate licensing agency is and try to get the agent in trouble. And my guess is at the end of the day nothing would be done by either party because they’re overloaded. You’d probably be wasting your time.

[davelj]

[quote=walterwhite]well, what if i track it (if I’m not accepted) and find the bank took a lower offer of equal strength. If i sue the agent, i suppose I’d have to prove the sale of the personal effects drove the decision on which offer to accept. This makes me angry. now I’m thinking I should have offered much less, but offered a large dollar amount for seller’s used stuff. probably would be much stronger of an offer. I feel like a doofus.[/quote]

Realistically, you won’t be able to “sue the agent.” The best you could do would be to contact both the lender and whatever the CA real estate licensing agency is and try to get the agent in trouble. And my guess is at the end of the day nothing would be done by either party because they’re overloaded. You’d probably be wasting your time.

[davelj]

[quote=walterwhite]well, what if i track it (if I’m not accepted) and find the bank took a lower offer of equal strength. If i sue the agent, i suppose I’d have to prove the sale of the personal effects drove the decision on which offer to accept. This makes me angry. now I’m thinking I should have offered much less, but offered a large dollar amount for seller’s used stuff. probably would be much stronger of an offer. I feel like a doofus.[/quote]

Realistically, you won’t be able to “sue the agent.” The best you could do would be to contact both the lender and whatever the CA real estate licensing agency is and try to get the agent in trouble. And my guess is at the end of the day nothing would be done by either party because they’re overloaded. You’d probably be wasting your time.

[davelj]

[quote=walterwhite]well, what if i track it (if I’m not accepted) and find the bank took a lower offer of equal strength. If i sue the agent, i suppose I’d have to prove the sale of the personal effects drove the decision on which offer to accept. This makes me angry. now I’m thinking I should have offered much less, but offered a large dollar amount for seller’s used stuff. probably would be much stronger of an offer. I feel like a doofus.[/quote]

Realistically, you won’t be able to “sue the agent.” The best you could do would be to contact both the lender and whatever the CA real estate licensing agency is and try to get the agent in trouble. And my guess is at the end of the day nothing would be done by either party because they’re overloaded. You’d probably be wasting your time.

[scaredyclassic]

it’s all hypotethical of course, but it wouldn’t take very long to file a complaint for $300 and make the agent hire a lawyer to defend or settle. Figure their comission on the sale is 15,000, settle for 3,000; cost of doing business?

I wouldn’t waste time filing a complaint with the licensing agency. maybe if more agents had to litigate smallish violations, they’d have a disincentive to participate in bribery.

[scaredyclassic]

it’s all hypotethical of course, but it wouldn’t take very long to file a complaint for $300 and make the agent hire a lawyer to defend or settle. Figure their comission on the sale is 15,000, settle for 3,000; cost of doing business?

I wouldn’t waste time filing a complaint with the licensing agency. maybe if more agents had to litigate smallish violations, they’d have a disincentive to participate in bribery.

[scaredyclassic]

it’s all hypotethical of course, but it wouldn’t take very long to file a complaint for $300 and make the agent hire a lawyer to defend or settle. Figure their comission on the sale is 15,000, settle for 3,000; cost of doing business?

I wouldn’t waste time filing a complaint with the licensing agency. maybe if more agents had to litigate smallish violations, they’d have a disincentive to participate in bribery.

[scaredyclassic]

it’s all hypotethical of course, but it wouldn’t take very long to file a complaint for $300 and make the agent hire a lawyer to defend or settle. Figure their comission on the sale is 15,000, settle for 3,000; cost of doing business?

I wouldn’t waste time filing a complaint with the licensing agency. maybe if more agents had to litigate smallish violations, they’d have a disincentive to participate in bribery.

[scaredyclassic]

it’s all hypotethical of course, but it wouldn’t take very long to file a complaint for $300 and make the agent hire a lawyer to defend or settle. Figure their comission on the sale is 15,000, settle for 3,000; cost of doing business?

I wouldn’t waste time filing a complaint with the licensing agency. maybe if more agents had to litigate smallish violations, they’d have a disincentive to participate in bribery.

[sdrealtor]

Seller has the right to sell for whatever they to whomever they want unless they discriminate against you and you are part of a protected class (btw, lawyers arent). The only remedy I can see would be in the case of a fair housing violation.

[sdrealtor]

Seller has the right to sell for whatever they to whomever they want unless they discriminate against you and you are part of a protected class (btw, lawyers arent). The only remedy I can see would be in the case of a fair housing violation.

[sdrealtor]

Seller has the right to sell for whatever they to whomever they want unless they discriminate against you and you are part of a protected class (btw, lawyers arent). The only remedy I can see would be in the case of a fair housing violation.

[sdrealtor]

Seller has the right to sell for whatever they to whomever they want unless they discriminate against you and you are part of a protected class (btw, lawyers arent). The only remedy I can see would be in the case of a fair housing violation.

[Author]

Posts