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.
My parents didn't do a listing as-is but their lawyer had them insert the as-is clause into the buy sell. Their buyer was fine with it. Obviously that is not going to be true with everyone. In that situation they weren't trying to cover anything up and there were no issues after the sale that I'm aware of. They had been counseled by their attorney to insert that clause to discourage the buyer from ever coming after them for any reason at any time.
Don't waste your time.
If you want to "protect yourself" with an "as is" clause for after sale "issues", you really can't if some big issue presents itself that didn't happen overnight and right after closing.
Quote:
I really don't want to put it in there becuase I don't want to be discouraging buyers. I've had one serious offer in a month so far and that fell through because they wanted me to come down more than I was willing. The last thing I want to do is wait another 30 days or more, have a deal on the table, then run them off by throwing that in the buy/sell.
Don't.
Man/Woman up and negotiate up front. You don't have to accept the "Christmas List" a buyer might hand you after an inspection. Make it very clear that cosmetics are off the table for negotiation.
Quote:
However my parents are quite persistent about this to the point that I am considering discussing it with an attorney now. The internet information I found so far, including here, indicates it's a fairly useless clause in the first place in my situation. If I get an attorney to tell me the same thing then I can come back and tell them what I already know.
You're parents buyer didn't have an issue with the "as is" being inserted after the fact probably because there were no crazy issues that came up during the home inspection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatswanlady
I suppose it's different if you're willing to do repairs, THEN turn it into an as-is. In my friends' case, the owner waited until he got an offer, then basically said "Oh by the way, it's an as-is sale. I'm not fixing anything." Shady business.
Are your parents really concerned that someone is going to try to sue you after the sale? Have they been burned by this in the past? I'm not doubting your parents' wisdom, it just seems like this is an excessive amount of worry, particularly if the house is in good shape. No
People who have something to hide, or are just flat out paranoid do this. 99% of the time, when a buyer finds out that the seller HAD to know about a MAJOR issue, there is NO WAY THEY COULDN'T, don't have the time or the funds to sue the ex-owner. It would cost more to sue than to fix the issue themselves.
BTDT. Not fun. Which is why when the last seller we bought from who pulled the "as is" BS AFTER the fact, we immediately said: we're still in AR, you're not getting over on us, our attorney will be sending your attorney a letter that states (in layman's terms): We'll accept your "as is" after the inspection and we are not held to the original offer once we find out what you're hiding.
So after the inspection we dropped our offer significantly, he walked away (with an email going over every point the HI made, and telling us we were clueless and so was the HI). We said "Bye"...he came back 2 weeks later and accepted our revised offer. This was the self proclaimed "best negotiator" he ever met, and his wife was #2. The man IS a big name in the entertainment industry, as a "supplier" of things needed for studios in NYC to function (legal things, like electronics/lighting). He was a slum lord. Let his tenants live with a stove held together by duct tape, but is making money off the hottest/longest running NYC late night "shows".
Nothing is ever set in stone, if you know what you are doing.
If the attorney is not involved at this stage, the seller can be screwed over in so many ways by the buyer.
I would appreciate a quick basic elaboration on what a buyer might be able to write into a buy/sell that would screw me over. Gracias.
People buy and sell without agents or attorneys involved all the time and it's fine. Now that said I am getting the point here that an attorney, who is less money than an agent by far, is not a bad investment because there are unscrupulous people out there including agents who might try to put one over on a seller.
An example tonight I had an agent call me who had someone that was considering making an offer contingent on the sale of their existing home. That fell through because they ended up going with another home BUT in my research this evening I found information regarding certain details that if I don't insert into the contract properly I could cause myself issues. These details, even if I told her agent I want them put in the buy/sell, might not be put in properly unless I see to that myself via an attorney. Would her agent do that to me? Lie? Probably not - but there is the chance. And I ought to be careful about that. So point taken.
I would appreciate a quick basic elaboration on what a buyer might be able to write into a buy/sell that would screw me over. Gracias.
People buy and sell without agents or attorneys involved all the time and it's fine. Now that said I am getting the point here that an attorney, who is less money than an agent by far, is not a bad investment because there are unscrupulous people out there including agents who might try to put one over on a seller.
An example tonight I had an agent call me who had someone that was considering making an offer contingent on the sale of their existing home. That fell through because they ended up going with another home BUT in my research this evening I found information regarding certain details that if I don't insert into the contract properly I could cause myself issues. These details, even if I told her agent I want them put in the buy/sell, might not be put in properly unless I see to that myself via an attorney. Would her agent do that to me? Lie? Probably not - but there is the chance. And I ought to be careful about that. So point taken.
I wonder how many pages including addendums could be in a fairly standard contract? Just as an indicator of the legal issues that need to be covered.
My parents sold their last home by owner and had their attorney check over the papers. I have a copy of that buy/sell and compared it to the one the buyer's agent presented me with on the last offer for the house. They are very very similar and there isn't a lot of obvious differences. That said I an going to involve an attorney from now on before I sign anything. If it were a buyer who was on their own with no agent I would be less inclined to be wary. But when they have an agent - I don't feel I can trust them enough to take any chances now.
I haven't read all of the posts here, but my sale and purchase contracts are pretty clear as to what "as-is" means:
1. You have done the inspection and negotiated any fixes and these are included in the contract.
2. You have agreed as to what items (chandeliers, appliances, etc.) will be staying in the house or will be removed.
3. Your contract states that all systems -- plumbing, electrical, heating, AC, etc. -- will be working at the closing.
Beyond that, there's various language about maintaining landscaping, etc. Most of this language in my contracts seems to be standard and not necessarily part of riders.
Once all these things are satisfied, the house should be as the buyer has seen it, except for normal wear and tear. If a window is broken between contract and closing, the seller has to replace it to put it back as it was when the buyer saw it.
If I ran into a seller making what seemed to be excessive as-is demands (and they weren't reflected by a lower asking price), I would run away. It means there could be some hidden problems that I should know about.
The contract from the first buyer I had. Her agent worked for prudential. It did not have the words as-is anywhere in the contract. This was a "standard" contract printed out of their computer system. The agent fills in some information but as-is definitely wasn't in there either pre-printed or inserted afterwards.
AFAIK the contract printed out of their computer system is basically the same either way. You are telling me they have two separate buy/sell templates based on whether they are representing a buyer or a seller? I realize the hand written details might vary but the basics of the form itself ought to be the same regardless.
How I write the contract will depend on representation. While my duty is to be fair to all parties, my obligation is to watch out for the interests of my client.
I appreciate the replies so far and the explanations. I do have a question about this.
Is the above stating that under a normal sales contract if something comes up in the inspection I am *required* to fix it at that point - no matter what? I can't back out of the sale at that point if I don't want to fix whatever this item might be? Does that also remove the right of the buyer to forgo having that defect fixed and go forward with the sale anyway?
Am I reading to much into this? Thanks
The inspection period is a period where the buyer has the right to walk away from the contract if they find a defect that is unacceptable to them. You are not required to fix anything, but the buyer is not required to accept the house with the defect. The buyer can forgo having the defect fixed, but that will not happen if the defect is expensive to fix. Usually if a buyer backs out of a contract over an inspection issue they get their money back (within the inspection period).
With an "as is" contract with the right to inspect the buyer usually has the home inspected and decides whether to accept the home after inspection. If the buyer finds a defect that is unacceptable to him he has the right to terminate the contract and get his money back.
At any rate, a house with a significant defect will not usually be accepted by a buyer.
Are you telling us that you're using the contract the BUYER's agent provided and not one developed with the SELLER in mind? Unless they are required to use a standardized or state approved contract, you have no idea what protections for a seller that may not be in their contract. It could be desigend with the buyer in mind and for their protection and benefit only.
If the OP is in FL that is typically how it is done. The offer that comes in is a contract from the buyer to the seller. If the seller has a counteroffer it is presented as a contract from the seller to the buyer. The contract is a standard contract that has been approved by the state. There is an "as is" contract.
The contracts offer certain checkboxes and places to fill in certain information but it is usually done via a standard contract.
If the OP is in FL that is typically how it is done. The offer that comes in is a contract from the buyer to the seller. If the seller has a counteroffer it is presented as a contract from the seller to the buyer. The contract is a standard contract that has been approved by the state. There is an "as is" contract.
Right on track as far as FL real estate contracts are concerned.
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.
