Property Title Question (1 Viewer)

[TakiToki]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

 

[Godsbrother]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

 

[jon_mx]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

I have been on the other end a couple times. One time a guy had a corner of a building which encroached upon my land by a couple feet. I had the unit sold, but had to deed the guy the portion of property for free in order to expedite things and close on the property. I should have been compensated for giving the guy land and his mistake. I have had other situations where subcontractors put illegal liens on my property, but had to pay off in order to close.

 

[Godsbrother]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

I have been on the other end a couple times. One time a guy had a corner of a building which encroached upon my land by a couple feet. I had the unit sold, but had to deed the guy the portion of property for free in order to expedite things and close on the property. I should have been compensated for giving the guy land and his mistake. I have had other situations where subcontractors put illegal liens on my property, but had to pay off in order to close.

Fair enough. I don't really have a problem with what you are doing and may do the same in your position. I am just being devil's advocate.

 

[LongDuckDong]

I'd stop talking about what you'd settle for. On here, anywhere.

All you are interested in is what your current rights are under your ROFO in the jurisdiction. ROFO's are not a one size fits all document, they are worded differently and the cures are very different in many of them.

I don't view lawyers as bloodsuckers, they're part of the system in which business gets done in this country. All you care about right now are your current rights. Don't worry about how you exercise them just yet.

And stop doing anything that could be discoverable in this case until it's settled. You can ask away about your rights. Stop talking about how you might exercise them.

 

[Godsbrother]

I'd stop talking about what you'd settle for. On here, anywhere.

All you are interested in is what your current rights are under your ROFO in the jurisdiction. ROFO's are not a one size fits all document, they are worded differently and the cures are very different in many of them.

I don't view lawyers as bloodsuckers, they're part of the system in which business gets done in this country. All you care about right now are your current rights. Don't worry about how you exercise them just yet.

And stop doing anything that could be discoverable in this case until it's settled. You can ask away about your rights. Stop talking about how you might exercise them.

You sound a lot like a lawyer

 

[TakiToki]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

I have been on the other end a couple times. One time a guy had a corner of a building which encroached upon my land by a couple feet. I had the unit sold, but had to deed the guy the portion of property for free in order to expedite things and close on the property. I should have been compensated for giving the guy land and his mistake. I have had other situations where subcontractors put illegal liens on my property, but had to pay off in order to close.

What I'm getting at is it doesn't have to hold up the sale. If the seller is a noted flipper, then competing title companies will push that stuff through like greased lightning. If the seller is insistent about closing at a buddy's company so they get a cut and/or give a kickback, oh well. That ain't a moral issue.

 

[jon_mx]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

I have been on the other end a couple times. One time a guy had a corner of a building which encroached upon my land by a couple feet. I had the unit sold, but had to deed the guy the portion of property for free in order to expedite things and close on the property. I should have been compensated for giving the guy land and his mistake. I have had other situations where subcontractors put illegal liens on my property, but had to pay off in order to close.

What I'm getting at is it doesn't have to hold up the sale. If the seller is a noted flipper, then competing title companies will push that stuff through like greased lightning. If the seller is insistent about closing at a buddy's company so they get a cut and/or give a kickback, oh well. That ain't a moral issue.

Every title agent in town knows me. I don't know of any who would push this through. But we will see. Day 1 of delayed closing.

 

[TakiToki]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

I have been on the other end a couple times. One time a guy had a corner of a building which encroached upon my land by a couple feet. I had the unit sold, but had to deed the guy the portion of property for free in order to expedite things and close on the property. I should have been compensated for giving the guy land and his mistake. I have had other situations where subcontractors put illegal liens on my property, but had to pay off in order to close.

What I'm getting at is it doesn't have to hold up the sale. If the seller is a noted flipper, then competing title companies will push that stuff through like greased lightning. If the seller is insistent about closing at a buddy's company so they get a cut and/or give a kickback, oh well. That ain't a moral issue.

Every title agent in town knows me. I don't know of any who would push this through. But we will see. Day 1 of delayed closing.

I'm a former abstractor and examiner for a large title company, and I just followed orders working the stack put in front of me. It was extremely obvious volume transactors and especially those that primarily did business elsewhere were given preferential treatment.

 

[LongDuckDong]

I'd stop talking about what you'd settle for. On here, anywhere.

All you are interested in is what your current rights are under your ROFO in the jurisdiction. ROFO's are not a one size fits all document, they are worded differently and the cures are very different in many of them.

I don't view lawyers as bloodsuckers, they're part of the system in which business gets done in this country. All you care about right now are your current rights. Don't worry about how you exercise them just yet.

And stop doing anything that could be discoverable in this case until it's settled. You can ask away about your rights. Stop talking about how you might exercise them.

You sound a lot like a lawyer

Real estate developer.

 

[jon_mx]

Unless I'm misunderstanding and/or misinformed, I don't think OP has a compelling reason to be a nice guy here. The seller could easily close elsewhere and another company would be happy to issue a title commitment based on the existence of the previous owner's policy without OP indemnifying. Then any claim from the OP would be against the previous insurer.

I agree that he doesn't know anyone here but morally it seems to be a bit of a #### move when the OP has zero interest in the property. I'm not saying the OP isn't smart for trying to get money out of the deal but if the shoe was on the other foot and you were trying to buy or sell the house and someone that had no investment in the property was holding up the sale you would be pissed.

I know that I would...

I have been on the other end a couple times. One time a guy had a corner of a building which encroached upon my land by a couple feet. I had the unit sold, but had to deed the guy the portion of property for free in order to expedite things and close on the property. I should have been compensated for giving the guy land and his mistake. I have had other situations where subcontractors put illegal liens on my property, but had to pay off in order to close.

What I'm getting at is it doesn't have to hold up the sale. If the seller is a noted flipper, then competing title companies will push that stuff through like greased lightning. If the seller is insistent about closing at a buddy's company so they get a cut and/or give a kickback, oh well. That ain't a moral issue.

Every title agent in town knows me. I don't know of any who would push this through. But we will see. Day 1 of delayed closing.

I'm a former abstractor and examiner for a large title company, and I just followed orders working the stack put in front of me. It was extremely obvious volume transactors and especially those that primarily did business elsewhere were given preferential treatment.

I have given these Title companies way more work than this guy. Plus I kniw the buyer'sagent who is a well respected (rare for a Realtor) commercial agent. No way does he advise his client to close with this issue unresolved.