... but this most recent one really surprised me.
I recently put in an offer on a short sale property for a client. I really thought the offer was a slam dunk. It was a full asking price offer that could be either financed or cash transaction. There were no ridiculous stipulations or anything.
I got a call from the listing agent a day or two later saying that she and her broker had met with the "owner" and had advised him to do a highest and best notice to the two competitors. Rather than do this, he accepted the other offer that better suited his post-possession needs.
This raises a very murky situation. My clients would have increased their offer substantially in a highest and best scenario, thus benefiting ting the lender in sustaining a lesser loss, and the owner by reducing the negative credit exposure of the transaction. The listing agent and broker have a responsibility to the Seller, technically not to the lender who could approve the transaction without over know that higher offer scenario exist. If they say something to the lender, are they crossing the line? If they say nothing, are they crossing the line?
It is my responsibility to protect my client's interest, and in that light just how far can I go to make sure that the lender knows all the scenarios, and if I do or don't, what kind of risk have I exposed myself to?
This thing is a mess, a sign of the times, and highlights what negotiating with a person in a desperate situation can bring. I am unsure how it will turn out, but understand that I will fight for my client within the limits of the law.
Comments(0)