Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The key here is that the tenant will leave for sure in Oct. So worse case you wait six more months to occupy the house. Is it a hassle? Yes. But for a house that you really like, will probably live in for many years, and considering there is no comparable in your price range. I think you should stick it out. At least until you see something else that you like.
Your agent or lawyer should draft an addendum that says you will stick around but can withdraw without penalty at anytime before the seller fulfills their obligation.
Btw, I'm assuming there is no rent control in MA? And also assuming the tenant will definitely leave in Oct. If those are not the case then it changes things drastically.
Reminds me of why I love real estate in Oregon without attorney's. If it were me, I would walk away and when the house is still on the market in July, reoffer then. Who does a 6 month purchase and sale agreement? A better house could come on the market in the meantime and then you'd be bound to this one with a crazy seller.
Location: Mokelumne Hill, CA & El Pescadero, BCS MX.
6,957 posts, read 22,309,298 times
Reputation: 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall
Reminds me of why I love real estate in Oregon without attorney's. If it were me, I would walk away and when the house is still on the market in July, reoffer then. Who does a 6 month purchase and sale agreement? A better house could come on the market in the meantime and then you'd be bound to this one with a crazy seller.
Reminds me of why I love real estate in Oregon without attorney's. If it were me, I would walk away and when the house is still on the market in July, reoffer then. Who does a 6 month purchase and sale agreement? A better house could come on the market in the meantime and then you'd be bound to this one with a crazy seller.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMenscha
I'm with ya' on this one!
Not sure I follow you folks. Where did the attorney screw up this deal?
4. Sellers verbally agreed to deliver the house vacant. We have a P&S (sadly, unsigned) sent by their lawyer that stated that the house would be delivered vacant.
An unsigned purchase and sale agreement is toilet paper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAndy12
2.) We've got some substantial sunk costs. (Inspections, lawyers fees, and the title search that our real estate agent ordered two weeks ago)
Only in east coast world does the buyer pay fees and such out of pocket without having an executed purchase and sale agreement. What attorney allows their clients to incur expenses without a meeting of the minds? Crazy, in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAndy12
Interestingly, as an aside with regards to the breach of contract, our signed offer to purchase states: If the parties are unable to agree on the purchase and sale agreement, then this agreement shall become the binding agreement between the parties.
This ^^^ and this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePRU
When it comes down to it, you have no case for breach of contract. The standard offer form that Realtors in MA use says that the offer is contingent upon the execution of a mutually agreeable P&S by X date. All the sellers have to say is that they didn't like the P&S that was drafted.
That whole offer, then purchase and sale agreement thing attorneys do on the east coast is such a waste of time and energy and clearly creates problems, as it did for the OP. We don't do that here. What a mess.
Everything I see about states that do the offer then purchase and sale agreement thing with attorneys is such a mess. Our offers are contracts and time is of the essence from the get go. Buyers don't spend any money without a contract. We can disagree, but from where I sit, the attorney's don't do a very good job of protecting buyers out there.
I much prefer our "attorneyless" transactions out here. I do have a company attorney that I consult with all the time on situations/clauses but he doesn't muck things up like this situation. I just don't see good buyer protection in this scenario.
If there is no written lease, what would the "tenant" of the previous owners be considered after you closed on the property?
A squatter? Trespassing?
If you already haven't, maybe you could ask your lawyer (or maybe you should find a new one - my RE Lawyer would NEVER make a move that would cost me out of pocket money unless he spoke to me first, my RE Agent is NOT his client), or the local police/sheriff's office?
In Oregon they default to month to month lease and landlord tenant laws still kick in.
Assuming that is the case for the OP, upon OP taking possession of the property, OP could give notice to the tenant that he will NOT be renewing the lease for the following term?
This is the part of the process that always confuses me because, to me, it's so ridiculous. I don't understand why a new owner is obligated to uphold a contract a past owner had with a tenant. The tenant doesn't have an agreement/contract with the inanimate property, it HAD one with the past owner who owned the property. Once the previous owner's legal ties to the property are severed, so should everything else the previous owner entered in to with a tenant or otherwise, like alarm system contracts with central monitoring, landscapers, garbage collection, land line bills, water/sewer/electric, etc.
Assuming that is the case for the OP, upon OP taking possession of the property, OP could give notice to the tenant that he will NOT be renewing the lease for the following term?
This is the part of the process that always confuses me because, to me, it's so ridiculous. I don't understand why a new owner is obligated to uphold a contract a past owner had with a tenant. The tenant doesn't have an agreement/contract with the inanimate property, it HAD one with the past owner who owned the property. Once the previous owner's legal ties to the property are severed, so should everything else the previous owner entered in to with a tenant or otherwise, like alarm system contracts with central monitoring, landscapers, garbage collection, land line bills, water/sewer/electric, etc.
In Oregon, yes that is how it would work. The new owner would give the tenant the required 30 day notice to move out. If they don't the new owner gets to evict them.
Actually the tenant has legal rights to the property. That is what a lease is. A legal right to occupy a property with specific terms. Just like CC&R's stay on the deed regardless of who owns the property, leases are similar. They run with the land for a specific period of time. That is why only crazy buyers (not investors) take on a property with a tenant still in it. Not worth dealing with the landlord tenant laws that come into play with those.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
