Real Estate Articles & Blog - Don Dunning
Menu
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don

Another New Contract, Part 2


By Don Dunning | May 24, 1996

Originally appeared in Hills Publications, May 24, 1996

It is crucial for you to know exactly what you are taking on when you sign a contract. As a buyer or seller, you may be presented with one of the two California Association of Realtors (CAR) contracts concurrently in use.

In part one of this series, I compared and contrasted some aspects of the previous eight-page and what is referred to as the new “four-page” (actually, seven pages) CAR purchase contract for residential properties, one to four units. This article will look at some other important contract issues you should consider.

Known or discovered

In late 1994, when CAR expanded the six-page contract to eight pages, the words “or discovered” were added to the word “known” when describing what the seller will “warrant” regarding condition of the property. This language falls into the category of “blank check” verbiage, i.e., if the seller agrees, he is accepting unknown and unlimited liability for that problem.

For example, if the seller knows of no problems with the roof, he might not feel concerned that this will come up as an issue for the buyer, even if the roof is old. What if the buyer has a roof inspection, a roofer determines it has been leaking into the attic, and it is at the end of its useful life? If the seller has warranted the roof to be free of leaks, he is obligated to provide the buyer with a new roof. The type and cost of the roof would be undetermined. If the existing roof is an expensive cedar shake, current code will not allow it to be replaced with the same fire-prone materials. The buyer may want to maintain the same look, however, with a costly, fireproof, simulated shake roof. The seller, conversely, would likely opt for a more modest composition shingle roof. This is a typical “blank check” scenario which can become a major disruption in the escrow.

Because this clause is potentially detrimental to the seller, he could have minimized his liability by deleting the word “discovered” from the warranty section, or adding the words “discovered by seller.” Had he done so, he would now have the choice of how much, if anything, to contribute to a new roof. Obviously, if the buyer was not satisfied with the seller’s response, he could decide not to waive his inspection contingency, thereby rescinding the contract.

The example above illustrates why it is usually wise for the seller to get a pre-sale home inspection. Had the seller done this, he could have replaced the shake roof with a roof of his choosing before marketing. This would have saved him money and avoided the mid-sale roof controversy.

As a listing agent representing the seller, my approach is to add language in a counteroffer which indicates that the cost of any work requested by the buyer is contingent upon the seller’s written approval. Sometimes, this is written with a dollar limitation, e.g., “Seller agrees to pay a maximum of $1000 for the cost of work requested by Buyer; any additional costs are contingent upon Seller’s written approval.”

Pest control peccadilloes

Although the Pest Control language in the four-page contract has been tightened up and shortened, the wording that has been carried over remains a possible headache for both buyers and sellers. Despite the fact that buyers and agents often give this little thought, it is precarious for a buyer to allow a seller to do the pest control work. Contract language in both the four and eight-page contracts give sellers this right. I routinely amend this on an addendum when representing buyers. Another buyer booby-trap is accepting responsibility for Section 2 pest control work. My reasoning behind both is discussed at length in my article, Not Just Termites, Parts 1 and 2.

On the other hand, the seller may be vulnerable when he agrees to provide a pest control certification before close of escrow. Unless deleted or modified in a counteroffer, the seller is agreeing to this when he signs the contract (either the four or eight- page). This is also discussed in Not Just Termites.

Active vs. passive removal

A contingency reserves the right to rescind the contract; it is a way out of the agreement. “Active” removal of contingencies means the buyer must remove or waive his contingencies in writing within the time periods specified in the contract. This is the safest route for a buyer and gives him more control than the alternative, “passive” removal.

As the word suggests, passive removal of contingencies is an automatic process. The contingency disappears unless the buyer disapproves in writing within the stated time periods. The danger for a buyer is that his contingency could be automatically waived before he realizes it. He would then be obligated to continue with the contract, even if there was something he wanted to negotiate.

Both the new and old contract state that passive removal shall apply unless the active box is checked. It could be confusing to agents using both contracts that the passive method is listed first in the eight-pager and the active method is first in the four-pager. Even though it is first in the new four-page contract, the active box must be checked for it to be in effect.

Destruction or damage

The eight-page contract has a “Property Destruction or Damage” clause which “applies only to destruction or damage that occurs after acceptance of the offer.” It specifies what will happen in the event of damage to the property while in escrow.

The four-page contract omits this clarification. Although there are rules of common law which govern this type of situation, the eight-page contract language leaves fewer loose ends.

Mediation

Both the new and old contracts include a clause mandating mediation in the event of an unresolved dispute between buyer and seller. The new four-pager, however, omits an explanation of the mediation process. Make sure you understand the differences between mediation, arbitration and going to court.

Short sales

A “Short Pay” clause is an addition to the four-page contract not found in previous versions. There are numerous instances in our area where the equity in the property is less than the loan amount. In these cases, the lender may be asked to accept less than a full payoff of the loan. This is called a “short sale.” This clause makes the contract contingent on the written approval of all lenders to a short sale.

Final Thoughts

It is difficult to keep track of all the nuances, and their ramifications, in repeated revisions to the CAR purchase contract. I share this problem with my real estate colleagues. It is easy to imagine the increased confusion which might ensue if future generations of both the four and eight-page contracts undergo “slight” modifications. As time goes on, the confusion could intensify. Add to the mix the fact that some agents use a contract form that is many years old, and you have more potential for turmoil.

It is possible that CAR might go back to the use of only one version of the contract. In the meantime, if you find yourself in the role of buyer or seller, choose to work with a technically adept professional and read your contract carefully.

Related Articles:

Another New Contract, Part 1
Contract Revised Again
Understand Before You Sign
Not Just Termites, Part 1
Not Just Termites, Part 2
 
 

Copyright 2012 Don Dunning (Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985)
Permission is given to freely copy any or all articles for personal and
noncommercial use provided they are copied in full without
modification and that proper attribution is given.
These articles may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, nor linked to from another site.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Categories


  • Adding Value – Gardening/Landscaping/Renovations (29)
  • Alameda (2)
  • Around the House (20)
  • Carmel (1)
  • Community (43)
  • Condos (2)
  • Environment (27)
  • Events (13)
  • Expert Witness (7)
  • General Information (23)
  • Going Green (14)
  • History (13)
  • Home Maintenance (15)
  • Homeless (1)
  • Homes for Sale (8)
  • Hourly Consulting (10)
  • Local Attractions (24)
  • Mortgages-Loans (9)
  • New Orleans (1)
  • Oakland Neighborhoods (27)
  • Oh, Please (7)
  • Parks (1)
  • Pets (4)
  • Real Estate (285)
  • Real Estate Advice (109)
  • Real Estate in the News (77)
  • Real Estate Newspaper Articles (164)
  • Restaurants (3)
  • Rockridge (1)
  • Shops (6)
  • Technology (1)
  • The Economy (48)
  • Travel (3)

Tags


Buying Buying a home California unemployment Choosing an agent City Ordinance Cohousing Communal Housing construction data mining Dimond East Bay Events Expert Witness gardening green living Historical Sites home inspections Home Loans home maintenance lead paint legislation Mortgages multiple offers Newspaper article Oakland Oaktoberfest Oktoberfest Online real estate organic Pets Points of Interest Real Estate Advice Real Estate Law real estate news renovation Rockridge schools Selling a Home shopping social networking Tax Credit Technology termites The Economy Travel

Archives


  • May 2017
  • February 2017
  • November 2016
  • September 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • January 2008
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • October 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003
  • November 2002
  • October 2002
  • September 2002
  • August 2002
  • July 2002
  • June 2002
  • May 2002
  • April 2002
  • January 2002
  • November 2001
  • October 2001
  • September 2001
  • August 2001
  • July 2001
  • June 2001
  • May 2001
  • April 2001
  • February 2001
  • January 2001
  • November 2000
  • October 2000
  • September 2000
  • August 2000
  • July 2000
  • June 2000
  • May 2000
  • March 2000
  • February 2000
  • January 2000
  • November 1999
  • August 1999
  • July 1999
  • May 1999
  • April 1999
  • March 1999
  • January 1999
  • October 1998
  • September 1998
  • July 1998
  • June 1998
  • February 1998
  • November 1997
  • October 1996
  • May 1996
  • August 1995
  • July 1995

Copyright © 2018 Don Dunning - Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985

Theme created by PWT. Powered by WordPress.org