new type of real estate fraud?

[jpinpb]

OK. See, I read this and that’s why I’m suspicious about Chambord.

[SD Realtor]

In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak.

[SD Realtor]

In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak.

[SD Realtor]

In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak.

[SD Realtor]

In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak.

[SD Realtor]

In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak. [/quote]

I am not clear that the description given in the original post constitutes fraud.

I have 2 short sale listings currently.

The seller “accepted” (in quotes because the bank has to ratify it) the first offer on each. This was not terribly surprising because the asking prices were compelling.

The banks have been working with those offers for weeks. They have asked for more money on one (which was agreed to by the buyer) and taken the other offer at face value. That was because the offer price was 15k above the broker price opinion (bpo).

It would not be in my client’s best interest to submit the other offers to the bank and start the short sale process working again. I have expressed both in the listing as well as verbally, that the newer offers (some of which are higher) will be taken as back up offers only (and will therefore not be address unless or until the live offers die).

Further, the bank is not interested in taking a new offer to the relevant investors and committees.

So that newer offers are not a waste of buyers’ time, I even disclose the numbers on the other offers (though I vetted this part past counsel). Two subsequent offers have been higher.

Bearing in mind that I am open to hearing opposing points of view, I cannot fathom what is fraudulent in such a situation.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak. [/quote]

I am not clear that the description given in the original post constitutes fraud.

I have 2 short sale listings currently.

The seller “accepted” (in quotes because the bank has to ratify it) the first offer on each. This was not terribly surprising because the asking prices were compelling.

The banks have been working with those offers for weeks. They have asked for more money on one (which was agreed to by the buyer) and taken the other offer at face value. That was because the offer price was 15k above the broker price opinion (bpo).

It would not be in my client’s best interest to submit the other offers to the bank and start the short sale process working again. I have expressed both in the listing as well as verbally, that the newer offers (some of which are higher) will be taken as back up offers only (and will therefore not be address unless or until the live offers die).

Further, the bank is not interested in taking a new offer to the relevant investors and committees.

So that newer offers are not a waste of buyers’ time, I even disclose the numbers on the other offers (though I vetted this part past counsel). Two subsequent offers have been higher.

Bearing in mind that I am open to hearing opposing points of view, I cannot fathom what is fraudulent in such a situation.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak. [/quote]

I am not clear that the description given in the original post constitutes fraud.

I have 2 short sale listings currently.

The seller “accepted” (in quotes because the bank has to ratify it) the first offer on each. This was not terribly surprising because the asking prices were compelling.

The banks have been working with those offers for weeks. They have asked for more money on one (which was agreed to by the buyer) and taken the other offer at face value. That was because the offer price was 15k above the broker price opinion (bpo).

It would not be in my client’s best interest to submit the other offers to the bank and start the short sale process working again. I have expressed both in the listing as well as verbally, that the newer offers (some of which are higher) will be taken as back up offers only (and will therefore not be address unless or until the live offers die).

Further, the bank is not interested in taking a new offer to the relevant investors and committees.

So that newer offers are not a waste of buyers’ time, I even disclose the numbers on the other offers (though I vetted this part past counsel). Two subsequent offers have been higher.

Bearing in mind that I am open to hearing opposing points of view, I cannot fathom what is fraudulent in such a situation.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak. [/quote]

I am not clear that the description given in the original post constitutes fraud.

I have 2 short sale listings currently.

The seller “accepted” (in quotes because the bank has to ratify it) the first offer on each. This was not terribly surprising because the asking prices were compelling.

The banks have been working with those offers for weeks. They have asked for more money on one (which was agreed to by the buyer) and taken the other offer at face value. That was because the offer price was 15k above the broker price opinion (bpo).

It would not be in my client’s best interest to submit the other offers to the bank and start the short sale process working again. I have expressed both in the listing as well as verbally, that the newer offers (some of which are higher) will be taken as back up offers only (and will therefore not be address unless or until the live offers die).

Further, the bank is not interested in taking a new offer to the relevant investors and committees.

So that newer offers are not a waste of buyers’ time, I even disclose the numbers on the other offers (though I vetted this part past counsel). Two subsequent offers have been higher.

Bearing in mind that I am open to hearing opposing points of view, I cannot fathom what is fraudulent in such a situation.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]In reality there is nothing “new” about this form of fraud. The only thing now is that we see many listings with substantially more detached “sellers” so to speak. [/quote]

I am not clear that the description given in the original post constitutes fraud.

I have 2 short sale listings currently.

The seller “accepted” (in quotes because the bank has to ratify it) the first offer on each. This was not terribly surprising because the asking prices were compelling.

The banks have been working with those offers for weeks. They have asked for more money on one (which was agreed to by the buyer) and taken the other offer at face value. That was because the offer price was 15k above the broker price opinion (bpo).

It would not be in my client’s best interest to submit the other offers to the bank and start the short sale process working again. I have expressed both in the listing as well as verbally, that the newer offers (some of which are higher) will be taken as back up offers only (and will therefore not be address unless or until the live offers die).

Further, the bank is not interested in taking a new offer to the relevant investors and committees.

So that newer offers are not a waste of buyers’ time, I even disclose the numbers on the other offers (though I vetted this part past counsel). Two subsequent offers have been higher.

Bearing in mind that I am open to hearing opposing points of view, I cannot fathom what is fraudulent in such a situation.

[DaCounselor]

This is a generality but fraud requires that a false statement be made – knowingly – with the intent to induce reliance on it. There is absolutely nothing fraudulent about a homeowner withholding better offers in a short sale situation. Now if the bank specifically inquires regarding other offers and they are told no other offers exist, that is probably fraud – a false statement being knowingly made to induce the bank to accept a lesser offer, which arguably damages the bank.

The fraud accusation is something that gets thrown around in the blogosphere quite a bit and in a cavalier fashion. I would estimate that 95% of the fraud allegations that I see in cyberspace are not fraud, and not even close to being fraud. It’s a word that many use without understanding what it really is. No offense intended to anyone, of course – just my observations.

[DaCounselor]

This is a generality but fraud requires that a false statement be made – knowingly – with the intent to induce reliance on it. There is absolutely nothing fraudulent about a homeowner withholding better offers in a short sale situation. Now if the bank specifically inquires regarding other offers and they are told no other offers exist, that is probably fraud – a false statement being knowingly made to induce the bank to accept a lesser offer, which arguably damages the bank.

The fraud accusation is something that gets thrown around in the blogosphere quite a bit and in a cavalier fashion. I would estimate that 95% of the fraud allegations that I see in cyberspace are not fraud, and not even close to being fraud. It’s a word that many use without understanding what it really is. No offense intended to anyone, of course – just my observations.

[DaCounselor]

This is a generality but fraud requires that a false statement be made – knowingly – with the intent to induce reliance on it. There is absolutely nothing fraudulent about a homeowner withholding better offers in a short sale situation. Now if the bank specifically inquires regarding other offers and they are told no other offers exist, that is probably fraud – a false statement being knowingly made to induce the bank to accept a lesser offer, which arguably damages the bank.

The fraud accusation is something that gets thrown around in the blogosphere quite a bit and in a cavalier fashion. I would estimate that 95% of the fraud allegations that I see in cyberspace are not fraud, and not even close to being fraud. It’s a word that many use without understanding what it really is. No offense intended to anyone, of course – just my observations.

[DaCounselor]

This is a generality but fraud requires that a false statement be made – knowingly – with the intent to induce reliance on it. There is absolutely nothing fraudulent about a homeowner withholding better offers in a short sale situation. Now if the bank specifically inquires regarding other offers and they are told no other offers exist, that is probably fraud – a false statement being knowingly made to induce the bank to accept a lesser offer, which arguably damages the bank.

The fraud accusation is something that gets thrown around in the blogosphere quite a bit and in a cavalier fashion. I would estimate that 95% of the fraud allegations that I see in cyberspace are not fraud, and not even close to being fraud. It’s a word that many use without understanding what it really is. No offense intended to anyone, of course – just my observations.

[Author]

Posts