I have (for me) a head-scratcher. Can someone explain, or conjecture, the logic of this:
Short sale proposal with BofA in Equator. The price is acceptable, and we agree on the net proceeds. Investor is a Trustee, BoNY, so the loan is presumably securtized.
The Buyers have not asked for a seller concession.
BofA rejected my request for Borrower Incentive, largely to pay reasonable closing costs.
BofA move the Borrower Incentive to a Buyer Credit, for the Buyer to pay their closting costs, unsolicited.
I countered by moving the Buyer Credit back to the Seller Side, accepting the net proceeds. So, my counter did not lower the Investor net.
But, BofA/Investor is insisting that the money be given to the Buyer.
First of all, I just don't understand the logic of this. To me, this just makes no sense.
Second, I would think there could by a legal issue here. What authority does the iInvestor have to "give" money to the Buyer. Suppose they were to give the Buyer $100,000, thereby increasing the deficiency. The Investor gives the future deficiency to the Buyer, and then claims they have the future right to collect the debt from the Seller?
HUMMMM....This just feels inappropriate to me.
Tags:
© 2024 Created by Short Sale Superstars LLC. Powered by
Short Sale Superstars, LLC and www.ShortSaleSuperstars.com does not endorse the real estate agents, loan officers, attorneys, real estate brokers and other participants listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs, blog entries and forums are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a short sale. Short Sale Superstars, LLC takes no responsibility for the content on these pages that are written by the members of this community.