I attend almost every closing. I find it personally helpful to understand both sides of the transaction, and to proofread all the columns for compliance with GFE, demands, closing costs etc.

The principals themselves usually don't need to see each others columns, and are usually not that curious.

I have seen closings where the other principals column was shown and instances where it was not.

I agree with Pam and disagree with the Walkers about the lender's right to see both sides. The lenders want to have all information available to their funding departments and post closing quality control departments to identifiy situations of possible fraud.


The amount of the proposed down payment is on the first page of every contract I have seen, so I do think it is the sellers business what the buyer put down. If it isn't then why is this in the contract? If the buyer brought less to closing than was agreed to in the contract and this caused delays and or additional expenses for the seller in closing then doesn't the seller have the right to know. The seller also has the right to know if the buyer did perform according to contract.

There are situations where I think the buyer would want to know (and possibly have the right to know) what the sellers bottom line or their payoff was. - For example if a buyer had to jump through short sale hoops, wouldn't they want to know if the sellers lender had been dealt with them honestly (or not)
Safeguarding the right to privacy is desirable whenever possible, it is a right implied by the bill of rights and interpreted by the supreme court.. The right to privacy is not an absolute, and it is certainly not an absolute in financial transactions.

If I was appalled at the presentation of a combined HUD-1, I would in the future ask my principals their views on the subject well before the preparation of the estimated HUD -1s and convey their preferences to the escrow company in advance..

In California : An agent is not obligated {by fiduciary duty} to reveal to either party ANY confidential information obtained from the other party that does NOT involve the affirmative duties set forth {as principals agent} i.e., a duty to disclose all facts known to the agent MATERIALLY affecting the value or the desirability of the property. The buyers and the sellers motivations do affect what they will contract to do, but motivations are not MATERIAL - They do not HAVE to be disclosed, even if discovered by the adversarial principal's agent.

This is my interpretation, your mileage may differ.

Sat Nov 17 2007, 10:34

In NJ, buyers and sellers are on the same HUD. It has never caused a problem, but I am in a high end market. I don't personally see the need for it. Maybe it makes things easier on the closing attorneys.

Thu Nov 15 2007, 18:16

Tennessee is very much the same as you Walker Group. Buyers & Sellers on the same side. I've never questioned it. But, now that you mention it, it would make a lot of sense to have it separate.

Sun Nov 11 2007, 20:00

In CA, each party only sees their own side of the HUD. I dot know if the buyer's lender would receive anything other than the buyer's HUD. This is something that I will certainly ask about on Tuesday though. I had never really thought about it. If the lender did get the statement, what would stop them from providing it to the Buyer's agent as a negotiating tool? I have never had that happen and would simply assume that they do not get it but....we all know what happens when we assume! What an excellent question! Thank you.

Sun Nov 11 2007, 11:37

In my state (Minnesota) the buyers and sellers sign separate HUDS but only the HUD with both side's signatures and numbers are recorded. I agree the numbers should be kept confidential.

Sun Nov 11 2007, 11:31

In Colorado the buyer and seller get BOTH sides and sign the SAME HUD. I know this because I see at EVERY closing and I ask everyone (agents/lender/title/attorneys) here and they just shrug it off.

I'm wondering if this is the norm elsewhere too because my experience in TX and prior to being an agent in CO was this was not the norm.

Sounds like it is not the norm in San Francisco. Glad to know.

Sun Nov 11 2007, 11:04

The buyers and sellers do not get the complet HUD as they only receive their side that applies to them.

The lender receivesboth sides to see what was agreeed upon is on the HUD and if there is anything illegial going on.

Sometimes the Realtors receive both sides of the HUD, buyer's and sellers portion.

Sun Nov 11 2007, 10:46