Nationstar / Auction.com
What's your story? Is your client being forced into Auction.com?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Thom Colby CA Brkr 888-391-5245 on
-
Bill,
The property is not "yours" until the OWNER (not the lender or servicer) has signed a Grant Deed transferring title to you, and settlement has occured. I've seen occasions where the short sale lender / investor has revoked an approval while Title was actually being recorded and it was stopped. The LENDER / SERVICER has no ability to transfer title on any property unless they already own it through foreclosure and have gone and the process of acquiring Title themselves. So in a short sale, you are buying the property from theOWNER who is NOT the lender, servicer or investor - they simply hold the debt that is being settled from the proceeds of a sale - short or otherwise.
-
Permalink Reply by Bill Sloss on
-
If I might make an observation there is a great difference between what you SAY and the end result. If I have a contract that is pending with consideration and depends on approval and the SSA entity says my price is approved the terms of that contract have been met. The house is mine whether they give it to me or a judge orders it thats the way it is. The contract is valid and if a judge rules in my favor and they will a court order granting the deed is as good as a signature. The problem is your profession has allowed the nonsense to go on instead of documenting each and every allegation and violation and taking them to task. Of course if Im wronged you have no standing I must act and they know buyers want the houses.
So the nonsense continues and will continue as long as its allowed to continue. Look at this comment made by one of your peers about the BA. Incredible. "Besides, the buyers agent can do nothing more than a good listing agent can do except get in the way of negotiations." I now how this type of industry works its the same as insurance. Fill the courts full of the right cases and let the judges make law. They dont want that to happen. You will then see change or youll have law.
-
-
the buyers best interest is served when communication from listing agent is received and given to the buyer as to the updates on the property.
There is no reason for the buyers agent to have authorization to speak with sellers bank ever.
Sorry, I know this seems like an easy thing to you but there are very strong legal reasons for this being done this way.
The buyer is not a party to the acts between the sellers bank and the seller period.
Besides, the buyers agent can do nothing more than a good listing agent can do except get in the way of negotiations.
As far as the BPO goes, the buyers agent can submit comps anytime they would like through the listing agent. I don't know of any problems on that end at all.
-
-
Phew.
First an authorization is a legal permission. There are no legal concerns with an appropriate authorization.
Second the buyer has been made party to the transaction by contract.
The transaction ie setting the value of the house is most certainly the buyers business and the buyer is entitled to the benefit of his representative. Period. End of story.
Article 1
When representing a buyer, seller, landlord, tenant, or other client
as an agent, REALTORS® pledge themselves to protect and promote the interests of
their client. This obligation to the client is primary, but it does not relieve
REALTORS® of their obligation to treat all parties honestly. When serving a
buyer, seller, landlord, tenant or other party in a non-agency capacity,
REALTORS® remain obligated to treat all parties honestly. (Amended 1/01)Besides, the buyers agent can do nothing more than a good listing agent can do except get in the way of negotiations. Surely you cant be serious making this comment? When does the sellers agent represent the best interests of both parties?
-
-
seller's agent does not represent the buyer but they should be working with the buyers agent and communicating all information necessary for the buyer to be a party to.
There is no such thing as a partial 3rd party authorization as far as I know. The bank sees the 3rd party authorization and uploads it into their system.
That shows them that the agent has the authority to speak with the bank about private, personal information about the seller.
Again, the listing agent does not have the authority to dictate who the buyer will use to get their loan nor to dictate the terms of the buyers loan any more than the buyer or their agent has the right to dictate any of the terms of the seller with their bank.
-
-
Please tell me how to enforce the other agent does a good job and acts in a timely manner with follow up and communication. Thank you.
As far as you know may be correct as far as you know. However an authorization can be drafted in any way for any thing. I showed you how easy it is to enter on a screen. JFiolleLtdUpdtsO whatever the authorization says.
Were not talking about private personal information were talking about a R/E transaction. I dont see how a BA allowed limited authorization to get updates and negotiate the best interest of the buyer as your ethics requires involves ANY private personal information. Sorry. And if anyone lets a SA act as a fiduciary for a buyer they need their head examined. The SA can ethically act in the best interest of their client as your ethics clearly state and that is the seller NOT the buyer. "buyer or their agent has the right to dictate any of the terms of the seller with their bank." Your statement does not apply as that is not the intention or objective of the buyer. If me being the buyer asks for disclosure so his representative can speak with the lender about negotiations at the point of the sale when that is entirely between the buyer and the lender and that request is refused you can keep your house and explain that to your seller. And what do you suppose your seller will say when they learn you not them deprived the BA of their ethical responsibility and the buyers legal rights to negotiate that cost them the sale and a caused a probable foreclosure? Thats how easy that is. Ill go find another house and you can explain your position to your E&O carrier. The final deal is between the buyer and the lender and its my money not yours so Ill decide how I spend it and how much not you. Sorry but thats the way that is. If I have a point I want made to the lender my representative not you will make that point if I so choose. I thank you and appreciate your kind comments but thats my position. I know what my rights are and I will protect my rights through the BA. Have a very good evening and I sincerely hope things get better for your profession and you can get some results.
-
-
"The final deal is between the buyer and the lender and its my money not yours so Ill decide how I spend it and how much not you. Sorry but thats the way that is. If I have a point I want made to the lender my representative not you will make that point if I so choose."
Exactly! That is the same for the seller and their lender. Well said.....
-
-
No its not exactly. The lender assumes the rights of the seller in a valid contract with a buyer and between the buyer and their representative they are entitled to establish the final price with the lender. If the seller doesnt want to sign the final contract so be it.
See how quick you got left out of that equation? Oh and the seller and the lender? The lender wants money the seller doesnt have. The seller gives up the house in consideration for settling the debt. The lender sets the price of the house through the BPO. The buyer decides if they want the house for the price offered. And you think you have a role in that final transaction between the buyer their representative and the lender? Interesting.
-
-
you still do not understand how the process works.
The BPO or appraisal is used by the bank to find the value of the property. Not to determine the price the buyer will pay for said property.
The offer price is what the buyer has said they are willing to pay for the property.
During this part of the process, the buyers willingness to change their offer price is of no value. It only comes into play after the seller and the lien holder have determined how much of a loss the seller and lien holder are willing to take.
The seller might agree to pay part of the loss, the lien holder may increase or decrease their loss. There are many things that can happen during this part of the process that have absolutely nothing to do with the buyer.
After the value is determined by the bank, they are able to begin the process, with the seller as to how much of a loss they are willing to take.
This may or may not be the same as the value. It again does not involve the buyer.
I am finished trying to help you understand how this works btw. I have made many posts to try to help you to no avail so anything else that I might say will not help you as long as you do not understand what has already been said.
Bottom line:
The buyer and the buyer's agent have no reason to be involved in the process that is between the seller, the seller's agent and the seller's lien holder at all. period, end of sentence.
-
-
You are apparently very confused . Please let me be of assistance.
You are correct about the BPO.
The offer price is what the buyer has said they are willing to pay for the property.
You are partially correct about that.
Bottom line:
The buyer and the buyer's agent have no reason to be involved in the process that is between the seller, the seller's agent and the seller's lien holder at all. period, end of sentence. The bottom line is this statement is meaningless.
The lender obtains the BPO and can reject, accept or counter the offer.
At that point the decision to purchase the property is the buyers and if the buyer has concerns the buyer has a buyers agent who is ethically bound to represent the buyers best interest. That best interest is determined solely by the buyer.Not the SA or the lender.
"After the value is determined by the bank, they are able to begin the process, with the seller as to how much of a loss they are willing to take." The investors make that determination and the last I checked the debt is being forgiven.
So now the investors have decided what they can take from the comps and the BPO and counter. From here on the buyer may or may not act depending whats in their best interest. And who has the buyer decided works in their best interest as does Article 1 not you, the BA. And if the buyer decides he wants his representative to discuss the matter with the lender that is what will happen if you want to sell the house and that is in the best interest of your client. Ill take it a step further if I have the option to walk away and I ask for updates or information and am denied same my best interest and the duty of the BA has been violated with the refusal to provide same or allow limited authorization especially if the lender is willing to do so. Mark my words someone is going to get jammed up over that silliness sooner or later. The buyers interests and the sellers interests coincide in only one area thats moving the property and you collectively should be doing everything you can to make that happen not arguing over authorization to discuss the property the buyer is entitled to have through their chosen representative to protect their best interest. That does not include being limited by the SA at the point in the transaction where the buyer has a right to represent and/or protect their interest. Thank you for the discussion I wish you the best.
-
-
well actually, I am not confused at all as I complete many hundreds of these transactions a year and am very well aquainted with the process.
We are getting closer though to you understanding this so I will try to further your education of the process.
When the lien holder accepts, rejects or counters the SELLER as to how much of a loss they are willing to accept, the SELLER has the option of paying the difference between what the buyer has offered and what the lien holder will accept, dispute the value the lien holder has claimed, ask the buyer if they would like to participate by bringing in a new offer or simply walking away from the deal and returning the buyers EMD plus any fees they might have incurred.
At the point where all of this is decided, that is when the buyer and seller will come to the table and finalize the deal.
The buyer should always be informed by their agent as to the process and what is going on but there is absolutely no reason for a buyers agent or a buyer to ever speak to a lien holder of a seller.
if a buyers agent is being denied this information from a listing agent, that is a violation and should be corrected but I do not know of a reason that a listing agent would not be informing the buyers agent of progress since it is also in their best interest to keep the buyer on board.
There are many sites that we as real estate professionals use that allow all parties to keep up with this information and most of us use them.
I would suggest that your agent asks for this access at the time an offer is made and then you will be able to follow the transaction.
The site that I use is called Short Sale Commander and it is a very good site for all parties to keep up to date on a transaction they might be involved with.
The listing agent simply sets up the transaction on the site and gives permission for which parties will have access.
This would also include the process for the buyers loan also.
-
-
-
You obviously remain very confused.
Please allow me to put this entire matter in perspective with a few short sentences that I hope you might understand the gravity of the situation.
First does the precedent still exist all the debt is being forgiven? I am under the impression it is. "At the point where all of this is decided, that is when the buyer and seller will come to the table and finalize the deal." The matter will be decided between the lender and the buyer. If the buyer walks your seller wont be sitting anywhere and then lender will receive 0 dollars. " There is absolutely no reason for a buyers agent or a buyer to ever speak to a lien holder of a seller." Now heres the part you may have some difficulty grasping. Under the Constitution of the United States of America..with me so far? I have certain rights that have been codified in various entities. YOU have absolutely no control over my rights. None. Still with me? And if you want to sell that house you will give me what I want. Thats how it is in America. And if I determine that speaking to whomever is in my best interest then my representative under Article 1 of your Code of Ethics will represent my best interests. If YOU deny that then you said best " if a buyers agent is being denied this information from a listing agent, that is a violation" I will make the determination what is in MY best interest. If you wish to dispute that be prepared to raise your right hand as you will be testifying under oath as to why you denied that and explaining how you did not properly represent YOUR clients best interest in selling the house. I will make arrangements for you to be intimately acquainted with your E&O carrier as you have absolutey no valid reason to deny that request. None.
"The listing agent simply sets up the transaction on the site and gives permission for which parties will have access." This is the limited authorization you said you never heard of"
I certainly appreciate your insight and continue to wish you the very best. I am sorry to have to tell you though that if its between what you say and the Constitution youre at a slight disadvantage.
-
© 2024 Created by Short Sale Superstars LLC.
Powered by
**********************************
like buttons