Why the NJ Law allow unfair real estate practice that a seller can back out for higher offer ?
The seller had an agreement with me about the price for the condo unit and sent me the contract. Durling the attorney review, the seller accepted another offer for higher price and shamelessly ask if I am willing to pay more. I ended up with paying the attorney review fee for nothing. I don't know why the NJ Law cannot protect the benefit for both side during the attorney review period. At lease, the seller should paid for the attorney's fee for the buyer in this case.
Thu May 15 2008, 14:47 - All locations - Home Buying - 1 answer
|
|||||||
| Answers (1) | ||
| Show me: Recent Answers Oldest Answers Highest Rated |
|
|
| Jeffrey Schn was FIRST TO ANSWER | ||
|
BEST ANSWER
FIRST ANSWER
Lenny,
Checkout the blog in the web reference to this article. It's a good source for an overview of the how and why for the attorney review period. Essentially, since you wanted the benefit of the attorney review, you opened up the option that the offer could be terminated by you, or the seller. This is what appears to have happened in your case. With the benefit of exercising the review period comes the risk that you don't have a fully executed contract that is binding on the seller, and the seller could do what appears to have happened in your case. Best of luck, Jeffrey Thu May 15 2008, 21:46 Web Reference: http://www.njlawblog.com/2004/10/articles/residential-r...
|
|
||||||
San Francisco real estate | New York real estate | Los Angeles real estate | Orlando real estate | Miami real estate | Philadelphia real estate | Phoenix real estate | San Diego real estate | San Jose real estate | Chicago real estate | Arizona real estate | California real estate | Florida real estate | Illinois real estate | Massachusetts real estate | New Jersey real estate | Pennsylvania real estate | Texas real estate | Other local real estate | Home price maps
Copyright © 2008 Trulia, Inc. All rights reserved. |