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.
Understand, this involves the assumption that none of the agents understand what the others are doing...
The assumption all contracts depend on is good faith.
The agents are acting in good faith ONLY if they are not privy to the truth.
If it's only right if most everyone is in the dark, then it's not right.
I realize it's probably not often an actionable offense... unless and until it is proven the confederate really has no intention or ability to actually follow through with the sale as offered. And they probably don't.
This whole scheme is to benefit Buyer A. If Buyer A is to benefit, one has to assume at some point, Buyer B will need Buyer A to take over, with either funds or signature or both. It's a bait and switch. If that is NOT clear in the offer, then it's not in good faith on the part of either buyer.
oh absolutely most would. I was just waiting for the explanation I expected and got.
At the same time, it might also be a very valid idea. What if Seller's agent tells them the house is worth $280K. Westcoast makes an offer for the market value, $280K. Seller responds to his agent "I still believe it's worth $300K. I'm going to wait"
then Confederate produces his $270K offer, and Seller's agent presents it. It is reality, and it is the professional thing to do to advise the Seller in nice terms "Look, I told you it was worth $280K. You've got 2 offers, one is for the market value and one's a little below. The market is telling you it's $280K. Do you want to accept the market value offer before they go away, or do you want to hold out" And perhaps the Seller "comes to their senses" and accepts the $280K.
Understand, this involves the assumption that none of the agents understand what the others are doing, and the Seller's agent had good reason (like comps) to have told them the house was worth $280K.
I see your point, but if you introduce some new facts, such as the seller's agent has initially told the seller it is worth $280K, then it stops being about Buyer A trying to use his friend to manipulate a lowball price. Instead, he agent and Buyer A independently arrived at the same price (which presumably makes it the correct price, since they both arrived at the same number; that's what will catch the seller's attention if anything does). Then the story becomes all about the seller having an unrealistic price in the first place because he didn't listen to his agent.
The confederaet, in this situation, is extraneous. If the seller is determined to ignore two people independently arriving at the same price, IMO he'll also ignore the confederate's offer. After all, the seller has already decided $300K is the right amount, and he'll choose to wait at least a few weeks for the price that he believes is correct. The only thing that is going to "bring him to his senses" is time.
Last edited by Piney Creek; 08-10-2018 at 03:06 PM..
The assumption all contracts depend on is good faith.
The agents are acting in good faith ONLY if they are not privy to the truth.
If it's only right if most everyone is in the dark, then it's not right.
I realize it's probably not often an actionable offense... unless and until it is proven the confederate really has no intention or ability to actually follow through with the sale as offered. And they probably don't.
This whole scheme is to benefit Buyer A. If Buyer A is to benefit, one has to assume at some point, Buyer B will need Buyer A to take over, with either funds or signature or both. It's a bait and switch. If that is NOT clear in the offer, then it's not in good faith on the part of either buyer.
I'm not an attorney of course, but to my knowledge, the Buyer's good faith is by not misrepresenting something, and by producing earnest money.
I'm not an attorney of course, but to my knowledge, the Buyer's good faith is by not misrepresenting something, and by producing earnest money.
Good Faith
Honesty; a sincere intention to deal fairly with others. Good faith is an abstract and comprehensive term that encompasses a sincere belief or motive without any malice or the desire to defraud others. It derives from the translation of the Latin term bona fide, and courts use the two terms interchangeably.
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.
