Real Estate Questions

[MacMadame]

Where did the price for the roof come from? Your realtor should have helped you get multiple quotes so you could pick the one you thought was best. It doesn't sound like that happened. Also, since your price was lower than other comps that should have been because the roof was older so it should already be included in the price.

If your offer was contingent on the inspection, and you don't fix the roof, then the buyer can walk without losing anything. As the seller, I'm not sure what your options are. I'm also confused as to what you signed exactly. There should be a modification to the original offer and you have to sign it. Just sending an email isn't enough.

 

[Vash01]

Where did the price for the roof come from? Your realtor should have helped you get multiple quotes so you could pick the one you thought was best. It doesn't sound like that happened. Also, since your price was lower than other comps that should have been because the roof was older so it should already be included in the price.

If your offer was contingent on the inspection, and you don't fix the roof, then the buyer can walk without losing anything. As the seller, I'm not sure what your options are. I'm also confused as to what you signed exactly. There should be a modification to the original offer and you have to sign it. Just sending an email isn't enough.

After the inspection the buyer hired a roofer to examine the roof. He gave a written quote, lusting what was wrong with the roof, and gave a quote of $9100 to fix it in a way that it would last 10 years.

My home price was considerably lower than that of some other homes that had upgraded theirs. Those homes have sold for a lot more than mine. You are absolutely right that the lower price in my case had already included what was not right (like the roof). Actually just a couple months earlier I had gotten a roofer to fix the broken tiles on the roof. I thought it meant the roof was fixed. Now the same person (different from the one who gave the $9100 quote) started saying after the inspection that my roof would last another 3-5 years but then I would have to get it replaced. The buyer is making it like an emergency in saying that it must be fixed before closing. My realtor talked to the roofer who had done work on my roof recently and told me that roof replacement can cost 12k-14k, so $9100 is a bargain and I should agree to that. These people work together, they change their opinions as suits them.

He did not try to get me the best deal. I have been unhappy with this realtor. He is anxious to just sell the house so he gets his commission. The first realtor was no different. When I got a low ball offer from an investor, he pressured me to agree. That’s when I said I am pulling it off the market.

Inspection is a requirement here, but buyers and sellers have the option to say no. The buyer didn’t say no. Instead he asked that I pay fir the roof. They did not want to walk away, or they would have. My option was to say no and walk away. I didn’t walk away when I saw that some efforts were made to find a compromise. It seems I am easy to p,ease, or just gullible.

My friend told me that when she bought her home, the seller refused to pay for the repairs and the buyer (my friend) also refused to pay fir repairs. The deal would have ended there but her realtor paid for the repairs, from her commission. So her advice to me was Be firm. It was already too late. I did not sign the contract again. I had signed it before the inspection (November 5). I don’t know what It means- still valid or no longer valid.

This has been a real nightmare.

 

[Deleted member 1204]

As I see it, at this point you (as the seller) cannot just back out of the deal.

After some initial negotiations, you agreed to an offer in writing and signed a contract. However, it sounds like that offer was contingent on the inspection. This is means to protect the buyer, not you.

If the buyer now wants to change the terms of the contract so that you pay for something else, you would need to sign a revised contract for it to be binding. I doubt that your subsequent email indicating acceptance of those changes would hold up in court, but the buyer could potentially try to use that against you.

If you have not signed a revised contract and don't want to pay anything else, it's up to the buyer to accept the original offer and deal with the roof himself, or he can walk away.

 

[Deleted member 1204]

Regarding the realtor, you keep saying that he should be fighting to get you more money. That is only part of it- you also hired him to get your house sold. Everyone loves to beat on realtors, but from what you have described, your realtor is doing real work for you. Appraisals are great, but in reality, a house is only worth what a buyer is willing to pay for it. Since you only have one prospective buyer at this point, it is not unreasonable to keep grinding through negotiations to achieve your ultimate goal, selling the house.

 

[Vash01]

As I see it, at this point you (as the seller) cannot just back out of the deal.

After some initial negotiations, you agreed to an offer in writing and signed a contract. However, it sounds like that offer was contingent on the inspection. This is means to protect the buyer, not you.

If the buyer now wants to change the terms of the contract so that you pay for something else, you would need to sign a revised contract for it to be binding. I doubt that your subsequent email indicating acceptance of those changes would hold up in court, but the buyer could potentially try to use that against you.

If you have not signed a revised contract and don't want to pay anything else, it's up to the buyer to accept the original offer and deal with the roof himself, or he can walk away.

Thanks for your inputs. I agree up to a certain point in your comment. The inspection is meant to protect the buyer, not me (seller). I will need to double check but I don’t think there was a revised contract (normally I receive a docusign for any revision to the initial contract). If I find that the second agreement (buyer paying a part of the roof replacement) was done by email and not by signing a document, I am not sure that would be a contract in the legal sense, but a lawyer could give me the answer.

I missed two opportunities to say no, and that is my mistake. When the buyer asked me to pay for the entire roof replacement, I should have said no. The buyer could have either walked away or agreed to do the repairs himself. The realtor pressured me at this point by saying that the issue would come up with the next buyer and it could cost me more.

When the buyer had to be convinced by his realtor that he needed to contribute something or the deal would be dead (I had already said no if I have to pay the entire amount). So he agreed to 2k plus 2k. At that point I was fed up and just accepted in an email to my realtor. The second time I missed the opportunity to say no.

Beyond that point things have become complicated.

I need to find out if there is a limit to how much I would pay for the roof. The agreement was based on the $9100 quote. I do t want to be in a situation where they come back and say - but it cost 12k, or 14k, so pay that (minus) amount.

This sounds risky to me. I definitely need legal advice. I will call the Lawyers referral service to find a real estate attorney. I don’t know if my estate planning attorney does this kind of work, but I will ask him if he does. One of my former coworkers who retired in January used to be an attorney and he knows real estate. I don’t know his contact info but I am definitely going to look for it. He had said that after retirement he was planning to use his law license to help people.

 

[Coco]

If you have always lived in an apartment building, and you are buying a house or a condo with a yard you'll need to keep up, SET ASIDE $2,000 FOR EQUIPMENT AND UPKEEP IN THE FIRST YEAR.

Also, splurge on two inspections.

 

[nylynnr]

I missed two opportunities to say no, and that is my mistake. When the buyer asked me to pay for the entire roof replacement, I should have said no. The buyer could have either walked away or agreed to do the repairs himself. The realtor pressured me at this point by saying that the issue would come up with the next buyer and it could cost me more.

The realtor is correct. If the roof needs repairs, any inspection will certainly expose that fact. I think the buyer is being reasonable contributing money to the repairs. Unless you're prepared to take the house off of the market for a while I would push forward with this deal.

 

[once_upon]

It depends on the email. All documents we signed for both buying and selling were done through an email link to contract signature. The actual wet signatures for selling came when we signed the title documents.

The day before they took possession we got an email asking us to approve the bill of sale. I assume but am not certain that was just an informal confirmation that we wouldn't contest something, both us had to respond separately not as a joint email.

We may have had the only respectable real estate agent who was fair to us and represented our interests rather than her own, but I highly doubt it. She gave us a fair assessment of asking price and guided us in what might need to be fixed.

My guess is if one inspection shows a new roof is needed, even if you can break the contract, subsequent agents/offers will also include the need for a new roof.

 

[Deleted member 1204]

I don't know if every state is the same, but in Texas, now that you know that the roof needs to be repaired, you are legally obligated to report it on a seller's disclosure even if you drop out of this deal and then list your home again later.

 

[MacMadame]

I am curious if the inspection said that the roof needed to be replaced/repaired now or if it said it needed to be replaced in a short time and the seller decided to use that as a bargaining chip though.

 

[Debbie S]

I am curious if the inspection said that the roof needed to be replaced/repaired now or if it said it needed to be replaced in a short time and the seller decided to use that as a bargaining chip though.

Yeah, a 3-5 year timeframe is hardly immediate. Buyers need to realize that when you buy a home, stuff is going to happen. When I've looked at places to buy, I always look at the age of the hot water heater and furnace and, when I was looking at houses, the age of the roof. You figure that into how much you want the house and how much you're willing to pay. And you can use that as a bargaining chip. But asking the seller to pay for something that is still in working order is obnoxious. When I sold my house, the (25-year) roof was 23 years old, the furnace was 15, the hot water heater was 10. The buyers had an inspection and they knew this. The end unit across from me sold at the same time for 6K more, but they had a new furnace (and a decorated/staged basement), plus I believe they provided some closing cost help. But 6K for a new furnace is about right.

 

[BaileyCatts]

…….. But 6K for a new furnace is about right.

Yep. My furnace broke in January right at the height of the Polar Vortex. It was $6,870. Plus tax.

 

[Vash01]

I don't know if every state is the same, but in Texas, now that you know that the roof needs to be repaired, you are legally obligated to report it on a seller's disclosure even if you drop out of this deal and then list your home again later.

It is the same here.

 

[Vash01]

I am curious if the inspection said that the roof needed to be replaced/repaired now or if it said it needed to be replaced in a short time and the seller decided to use that as a bargaining chip though.

The inspection said the roof had specific problems and it should be replaced but didn’t state the timeline. The roofer I talked to said it will need to be replaced but not immediately. He said it could last 3-5 years. The buyer used it as a bargaining chip when they said they wanted the roof replaced before closing with a 10 year warranty.

 

[once_upon]

Didn't you say you recently replaced some tiles? The inspection most likely found a difference in age of tiles. If I was a buyer I would have put that as a contingency of purchase, because it indicates you already knew of a problem and tried to correct it without full replacement. Had you disclosed that to your realtor?

 

[Vash01]

Didn't you say you recently replaced some tiles? The inspection most likely found a difference in age of tiles. If I was a buyer I would have put that as a contingency of purchase, because it indicates you already knew of a problem and tried to correct it without full replacement. Had you disclosed that to your realtor?

I asked the roofer (2-3 months ago) to fix what is needed, and he said he fixed that. I mentioned the roof repair that was done also 2 years ago (different roofer) and the more recent one on the Disclosure form. at no point a roofer had said that the roof needed to be replaced. There had been no leaks. So I was surprised when the talk of replacing the whole roof started. I called the same roofer to get his opinion. He said the roof needs to be replaced but if I stayed in the home, I would have to do that in about 3-5 years. I asked if the roof needed emergency repair and he said no. It was a matter of time.

 

[Deleted member 221]

I understand the buyer, generally. With home repairs, you don't want to throw good money after bad. If it's an old roof, better to replace it and get a warranty than to sink money into fixing it for an uncertain time-frame with no guarantee. One of the properties I bought had roofing issues that would have cost $1000 to fix. The independent inspector told me I could get up to seven years out of the repairs, but there was no guarantee that the roof wasn't going to spring more leaks in those seven years because it the roof was overall in bad shape. In the end, I decided to spend $5000 on a new roof with a 12-year guarantee and a 25-year life expectancy. If something is just old and not having issues, that's one thing. If it's old and having issues, I generally believe in replace v. repair.

This particular house had a roof, HVAC, and water heater that were all at or beyond any reasonable life expectancy, plus a few other minor issues. None of these were disclosed. I negotiated a $13k credit, which is what I thought it would take for me to replace those items, and I didn't budge. It was take it or leave it, and I was prepared to walk away. The sellers didn't like it, but I got what I wanted. As others have said, they became legally obligated to disclose the issues I found. And once they disclosed those issues, any other buyer would have started deducting money from the purchase price. If they had disclosed the age of these issues on the mandatory disclosure form, that would have been a different story.

Back to the issue at hand.... is one potential solution to credit the buyer $7100 ($9100 v. the 2000 he is chipping in), so that you can be done with it and not bear the risk? Personally, I would never -- and my two best real estate agent friends agree -- let any seller do repairs. They have no incentive to get it right and every incentive to keep the cost as low as possible, even when it comes with a large quality tradeoff. I made this mistake once as a seller - I made quality repairs, but the buyer expected gold-plated ones, apparently. Never again. Whether buying or selling, accept as-is, negotiate a cash credit or price reduction, or walk away.

 

[Vash01]

I understand the buyer, generally. With home repairs, you don't want to throw good money after bad. If it's an old roof, better to replace it and get a warranty than to sink money into fixing it for an uncertain time-frame with no guarantee. One of the properties I bought had roofing issues that would have cost $1000 to fix. The independent inspector told me I could get up to seven years out of the repairs, but there was no guarantee that the roof wasn't going to spring more leaks in those seven years because it the roof was overall in bad shape. In the end, I decided to spend $5000 on a new roof with a 12-year guarantee and a 25-year life expectancy. If something is just old and not having issues, that's one thing. If it's old and having issues, I generally believe in replace v. repair.

This particular house had a roof, HVAC, and water heater that were all at or beyond any reasonable life expectancy, plus a few other minor issues. None of these were disclosed. I negotiated a $13k credit, which is what I thought it would take for me to replace those items, and I didn't budge. It was take it or leave it, and I was prepared to walk away. The sellers didn't like it, but I got what I wanted. As others have said, they became legally obligated to disclose the issues I found. And once they disclosed those issues, any other buyer would have started deducting money from the purchase price. If they had disclosed the age of these issues on the mandatory disclosure form, that would have been a different story.

Back to the issue at hand.... is one potential solution to credit the buyer $7100 ($9100 v. the 2000 he is chipping in), so that you can be done with it and not bear the risk? Personally, I would never -- and my two best real estate agent friends agree -- let any seller do repairs. They have no incentive to get it right and every incentive to keep the cost as low as possible, even when it comes with a large quality tradeoff. I made this mistake once as a seller - I made quality repairs, but the buyer expected gold-plated ones, apparently. Never again. Whether buying or selling, accept as-is, negotiate a cash credit or price reduction, or walk away.

The buyer is paying only 2k of the 9100 that is needed for repair. I a. Supposed to pay 7100 (or more if the actual work costs more than 9100). They are treating this like an emergency situation, though it is not.

I should have been firm when they asked me to pay 100 percent cost of the roof replacement and walked away. When they saw that I may actually pay if they chipped in just a little, they used it for bargaining. My realtor had no incentive to help me once he saw that I really wanted to sell the home. If I ever sell a house again, I will not repair anything.

Lesson learned.

 

[Vash01]

If you have always lived in an apartment building, and you are buying a house or a condo with a yard you'll need to keep up, SET ASIDE $2,000 FOR EQUIPMENT AND UPKEEP IN THE FIRST YEAR.

Also, splurge on two inspections.

I have not lived in an apartment building in a very long time. I have owned my home for 25 years. My employer paid the closing costs and more, so money was not really an issue back then. The maintenance costs have gone up, with everyone raising their rates, and having to get things fixed or replacing them. I spent a lot on repairs before putting the house on the market. So I was quite frustrated about having to spend so much on the roof that was repaired just a few months earlier.

 

[vesperholly]

If you have always lived in an apartment building, and you are buying a house or a condo with a yard you'll need to keep up, SET ASIDE $2,000 FOR EQUIPMENT AND UPKEEP IN THE FIRST YEAR.

Also, shop estate sales for outdoor tools! I got a nice ladder for $10, heavy duty Craftsman rubber hose for $8, multiple kinds of rakes/shovels for $2-5, sprinkler for $2, etc.

 

[fsfann]

I'm a realtor in Canada, so I don't know the ins and outs of US Real Estate, but I find it strange that you have an agreement to sell your home but you don't have a closing date yet? Our contracts have a number of conditions built into them and one of the main parts is for both parties to agree on a closing date.

I also find it strange that you agreed to the roof thing, but that no paperwork was signed??? Any time we have a change to a contract, we need to sign an amendment and boht buyer and seller need to agree to it.

Maybe I'm missing something?

 

[fsfann]

I"m also not sure how you have a listing agreement but no timeline? (For example, in my area if you want it to be listed on MLS, then you need to do at least a 3 month listing, but most of my clients list a property for 6 months).

It's important to remember that you have hired a realtor to represent you and to try to get you as much money in your pocket as possible. Your house was on the market for 2.5 months and didn't sell... (From your post, it sounds like it's a seller's market, so typically taht means that the listing price is too high). I expect you listed it with Realtor #2 at a slightly lower price... he was able to get you an offer in your hands that was reasonable from waht you said... The buyers then wanted the roof replaced at your expense and in the end, he was able to get them to pay $4,000 towards the total cost. Personally, I'm not seeing anything here that is unreasonable. You don't have to agree to do the work and you can take the chance of these buyers walking away, but to lose a sale over $5,000 likely isn't worth it - if there aren't a bunch of offers lining up behind the existing offer...

I'm not sure if that all makes sense, but if you do have any other questions, feel free to ask! =)

 

[Vash01]

I'm a realtor in Canada, so I don't know the ins and outs of US Real Estate, but I find it strange that you have an agreement to sell your home but you don't have a closing date yet? Our contracts have a number of conditions built into them and one of the main parts is for both parties to agree on a closing date.

I also find it strange that you agreed to the roof thing, but that no paperwork was signed??? Any time we have a change to a contract, we need to sign an amendment and boht buyer and seller need to agree to it.

Maybe I'm missing something?

You clearly don't know US real estate. There was a closing date from the very beginning. It was renegotiated twice and it is final now. The paperwork was signed by both parties at every step.

ETA:The reason you don't see buyers lining up for my home is that the offer came the day the home went back on market. So no more showings were arranged while we were negotiating. Had they been unsuccessful, the home would have gone back on the market. It is 'pending' (not sure if this is the current term) while the process is going on.

There is no timeline on listing. Once a house is listed it goes on the market same day. There is no limit to how long it stays listed. Either it gets sold or they decide to take it off the market or it stays listed until the buyer wants it too.

Regarding how this sale was agreed on, you don’t have first hand information. This realtor did nothing to help me until I told him I would not sell (meaning he gets zero commission). I am not surprised that you tried to justify the realtor (your own).

I don’t want to discuss this with someone who does not know US real estate.

 

[once_upon]

I believe the contract we had with our realtor was a specific time contract that she would represent us - I think 90 days at which time we could extend or discontinue her services (our house sold in 5 days so we didn't need to make a decision). So I think fsfan has that right. Closing dates were negotiated so he/she is right about a closing date on contracts at each stage. In a seller's market, which it is in my area, if a house is priced right it goes quickly. We knew from the get go of listing what her commission would be - it was clearly stated in her prepared documents. When we signed her as our agent everything was upfront and ethical.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience but to take out your anger out on someone who didn't need to tell he/she is a realtor is uncalled for. Just because you are pi$$ed at not making as much as you wanted doesn't mean you should take it out on people who are giving you advice THAT you asked for.

 

[fsfann]

It's funny to have someone come on a board and ask for advice and then get angry when questions are asked and advice is offered - with full disclaimers, I might add. I"m sorry you had a bad experience, but for the record, I have been in this business for a decade and average about 75-100 deals per year, so I am fairly well versed on how things work.

I can't imagine a realtor signing a listing contract with no deadline as a significant amount of money is spent on marketing and advertising... to be able to cancel a listing a week after the paperwork seems completely bizarre to me, and I have never heard of a contract that didn't have a start date and an end date. With that being said, if it was the case and I was aware that a seller listed with 2 or 3 agents and fired them all within a couple of days I would likely avoid working with that person.

Best of luck.

 

[meggonzo]

Although we have not yet agreed on the closing date, we are at a point where I wrote in an email to my realtor that the deal was acceptable to me. He communicated that to the buyer's agent. I was contacted by the title company to sign the escrow papers. I was never really happy with this deal, but I accepted it, because I was so fed up.

I did not sign the contract again. I had signed it before the inspection (November 5). I don’t know what It means- still valid or no longer valid.

I will need to double check but I don’t think there was a revised contract (normally I receive a docusign for any revision to the initial contract)

There was a closing date from the very beginning. It was renegotiated twice and it is final now. The paperwork was signed by both parties at every step.

@Vash01 Your posts above indicate that you had not agreed yet on a closing date, nor did you know if you had actually signed a document for the buyer's change after the inspection.

 

[Vash01]

I believe the contract we had with our realtor was a specific time contract that she would represent us - I think 90 days at which time we could extend or discontinue her services (our house sold in 5 days so we didn't need to make a decision). So I think fsfan has that right. Closing dates were negotiated so he/she is right about a closing date on contracts at each stage. In a seller's market, which it is in my area, if a house is priced right it goes quickly. We knew from the get go of listing what her commission would be - it was clearly stated in her prepared documents. When we signed her as our agent everything was upfront and ethical.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience but to take out your anger out on someone who didn't need to tell he/she is a realtor is uncalled for. Just because you are pi$$ed at not making as much as you wanted doesn't mean you should take it out on people who are giving you advice THAT you asked for.

That poster admitted that she didn't know US real estate. Then she asked me questions which I answered. It was clear that she did not know the situation. Why should I accept her advice if she was assuming a lot of things incorrectly?

BTW the length of the contract depends on the realtor, from what I discovered. Some realtors want a 6 month contract, some want 3 months. Some allow the client to break the contract and I assume some do not. My realtor did not have a time limit. I could cancel the contract any time.

 

[Deleted member 1204]

You clearly don't know US real estate. There was a closing date from the very beginning.

That's not fair- none of your previous posts suggest that.

 

[hanca]

Reading this thread, it seems to be quite risky to advise you, @Vash01 . One would be worried they will have their head bitten off if you don’t like what you read.

 

[overedge]

Regarding how this sale was agreed on, you don’t have first hand information. This realtor did nothing to help me until I told him I would not sell (meaning he gets zero commission). I am not surprised that you tried to justify the realtor (your own).

This is really uncalled for. Regardless of whether it's in the US or Canada, realtors do a lot more than sell the listing after it's activated. How do you think your house even got listed for sale? The realtor did all the paperwork and collected all the information to put that listing together and post it. The realtor was also involved in the negotiations with the buyers that made the offer. Saying the realtor did nothing "to help you" is wrong.

And as for your suggestion that @fsfann was defending your realtor because he's one of their "own", I can assure you that realtors don't like (allegedly) incompetent realtors either. Bad realtors make the whole real estate industry look bad too, and they also make good realtors' work a lot more difficult. Good realtors are not going to defend (allegedly) bad realtors just because they're in the same profession.

IMO you owe @fsfann an apology.