Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Pam Jank on October 11, 2009 at 1:43pm

Was it an all cash offer with no financing contingency? If the Buyer's offer was subject to Financing it is possible the lender will no longer fund his loan because he lost his job. Buyer's financing contingency should allow him out of the contract and return of his E.M. See if you can get a letter from Buyer's lender verifying they will not finance the loan.

Permalink Reply by Karla Leahy on October 12, 2009 at 1:03am

thank you, it was subject to financing but the buyer removed himself from the contract prior to losing his job.

Pam Jank said:

Was it an all cash offer with no financing contingency? If the Buyer's offer was subject to Financing it is possible the lender will no longer fund his loan because he lost his job. Buyer's financing contingency should allow him out of the contract and return of his E.M. See if you can get a letter from Buyer's lender verifying they will not finance the loan.

Permalink Reply by Jeff Payne on October 15, 2009 at 4:32am

Had Wells Fargo approved the SS and then the buyer walked? Did he have any other contingencies such as lender approval or inspections? There is not much you can do about the EMD if the parties do not agree, you would then need to follow your states or MLS rules for escrow disputes.
I think the buyer should get his EMD back but that is just me, AND I am a listing agent :)

Permalink Reply by Karla Leahy on October 15, 2009 at 4:37am

The reason why my seller doesn't feel the borrower shouldn't get his EMD is he walked prior to losing his job. then he lost his job. if he didn't walk the financing contingency would have kicked in and he would of received his EMD by default.


Jeff Payne said:

Had Wells Fargo approved the SS and then the buyer walked? Did he have any other contingencies such as lender approval or inspections? There is not much you can do about the EMD if the parties do not agree, you would then need to follow your states or MLS rules for escrow disputes.
I think the buyer should get his EMD back but that is just me, AND I am a listing agent :)

Permalink Reply by Wendy Rulnick on October 15, 2009 at 12:12pm

I understand your seller's sentiments, but it is almost a moot point now. Refer to attorney, legal, state commissions as Jeff says.

Permalink Reply by Michelle Barrow on October 16, 2009 at 4:26pm

Had the short sale approval time period expired on the short sale addendum? I think buyer should get his EMD back.

Permalink Reply by Karla Leahy on October 17, 2009 at 4:26am

i agree. i spoke to my seller more and they want to at least recoup the cost of the house cleaning that needed to be done to put it back on the market. hopefully the buyer will agree to those terms.

Permalink Reply by Jeff Payne on October 23, 2009 at 3:00am

I probably think a little differently, the seller wants to be compensated for cleaning their own home? My 2 cents is that the seller should release the EMD..

Karla Leahy said:

i agree. i spoke to my seller more and they want to at least recoup the cost of the house cleaning that needed to be done to put it back on the market. hopefully the buyer will agree to those terms.

Permalink Reply by Karla Leahy on October 23, 2009 at 3:26am

my seller has all the information regarding her releasing the earnest money but it is her decision in the end.

Permalink Reply by David Dee on December 4, 2009 at 8:59pm

I believe seller should release the deposit if I were the Listing Agent. It is a shortsale so I don't think banks would want any funds to go to the seller. That is one of the stipulations of a shortsale.

Permalink Reply by Kathy Fuhriman on December 22, 2009 at 6:52am

Utah short sale addendum says that the buyer or seller could cancel at any time prior to bank approval without the loss of EMD.