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

Unwritten Contingencies


By Don Dunning | May 20, 2000

Originally appeared in Hills Publications, May 19, 2000 and ANG Newspapers, May 20, 2000

In our current, hyperactive market, competition causes a substantial number of buyers to waive contingencies to make their offers appear stronger. There are dangers to this practice that are not always understood by buyers, sellers and even some of the agents representing them. Ignorance, however, will not protect you from subsequent problems.

Buyer’s contingencies in writing

A contingency written into the contract is generally designed to protect the buyer. It signals to the seller that the buyer needs to do certain things in order to buy the house. Written contingencies have time frames in which they must be removed.

The two most common contingencies are inspections and financing, but many others are possible. Buyers are entitled to comprehensive inspections of the home and grounds so they can be aware of any problems and how to handle them.

The majority of buyers need to borrow money from a lender. A loan contingency means the buyer and property must be approved for a loan or else the sale cannot be completed.

Contingencies in reality

A buyer might need a bank loan even though this was not stated in his contract. This is called a contingency “in fact,” or a contingency “in reality.”

Buyers’ agents commonly write offers without a financing contingency, even though the buyer obviously needs a loan. The justification is the accompanying pre-approval letter, which indicates, subject to an appraisal of the property, the lender has approved the buyer.

Likewise, some real estate salespeople advise their buyers to omit an inspection contingency. Ostensibly, this is a strong offer because it is contingency-free. Nevertheless, further examination shows most of these to be Swiss cheese.

Dangers to buyers

Waiving an inspection contingency without the benefit of your own, thorough inspections is very risky. You might be paying a premium for a home with serious deficiencies that you do not have funds to fix.

Even if you have a pre-approval letter, this is not a 100% guarantee that the lender will grant you the loan. By not having a financing contingency, you are telling the seller that you can and will come up with the money necessary to close even if your loan is denied. This is equally true if you need proceeds from the sale of another property and have not written this as a contract contingency. Do not be so naïve as to think you will not be held personally responsible if you cannot perform.

In order to be competitive, buyers are encouraged to submit large deposits. Three per cent of the purchase price is common; higher amounts are not unusual. A buyer who has contingencies that were not written into the contract needs to be concerned about being able to retrieve his deposit if the escrow does not close. Additional penalties could also be assessed to the buyer, depending on contract language.

Dangers to sellers

If this market goes south, buyers at some future date may be upset at the difference between what they paid and the diminished value of their home. History has shown that some of these buyers will search for wrongdoing in the transaction.

One possibly fruitful area could be failure of the seller and agents to ensure the buyer had a sufficient opportunity to fully inspect the property. If he later discovers costly problems, the buyer might claim he wanted inspections, but was coerced into not getting them in order to have a chance of buying in competition. I recommend an inspection contingency in contracts for buyers, regardless of the number of other offers.

Similarly, I strongly encourage my sellers to insist that the successful bidder on their home have an adequate chance to perform inspections. I tell buyers’ agents who write offers on my listings that if they do not include an inspection contingency in their contract, I will add it in a counteroffer.

Likewise, buyers should have a written loan contingency unless they can provide substantiation of the source of all the funds needed to close the transaction. I counsel my sellers not to rely on a pre-approval letter as proof positive that a loan contingency is not needed.

I explain to sellers that, even if the buyer has omitted a loan contingency, having one for an appraisal amounts to the same thing. This is true even though the buyer’s agent presents it as an offer that does not need loan approval.

In fact, the house still needs to appraise for full price unless the buyer has put down more than 20 per cent of the purchase price. If not, the buyer can cancel and is entitled to have his deposit refunded.

Final Thoughts

In an auction-like atmosphere, buyers and their agents will go to great lengths to get their offer accepted. Contracts represented as contingency-free, often are not. As a buyer or seller, you need to know the difference.

The most professional Realtors have the experience and knowledge to help you distinguish a solid written agreement from a shaky one. Make sure to choose an agent who will not let you be the victim of what is unstated in the contract.

Related Articles:

Multiple Offers, Part 1
Multiple Offers, Part 2
Condition is Critical

 

 

Copyright 2000 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