Hello Jcosta,
Practically speaking, the concept of suing someone that doesn't have any money seems problematic. However, technically speaking, when you write the offer and list the personal property that conveys with the home, those items have to be in the home when you close, in order to be compliant with the contract.
Another practical consideration is that in a short sale, the seller is voluntarily doing the short sale, in order to avoid the more negative consequences of the foreclosure, from the seller's perspective. So the seller should be motivated to comply with the terms of the sale and should want to avoid giving the buyer reasons to back out of the contract. It would take an unusually dense seller to actually remove personal property in a short sale and upset the buyer. It is ultimately not in the seller's best interest to do this.
Keep in mind that a short sale is very different from a foreclosure, from the seller's perspective. In a foreclosure, the house is taken by the bank, and the seller doesn't know who will purchase the home, so they may be more inclined to damage the property, if they are that type of person. It's still not right, but may feel "victimless" to the seller. It is very different in a short sale, as described in the previous paragraph.
Thanks,
Sonal - Tue Mar 13, 2012