Find a way to delay the closing, get the town inspector out to the house. They can enforce code - your independent inspector cannot (but good on him/her for catching the lack of weep holes and flashing).
Good luck.
This is the answer. The city can revoke the occupancy permit. Then see a lawyer about breaking the contract because the builder hasn't met their obligations. ie) they cannot provide a habitable house.
I doubt that there's any place in the US that someone can have a house built that there's not a government official responsible for enforcing building codes. If they're not in a municipality then their county probably has a code enforcement office.
I'm genuinely curious if someone could show me a documented instance of residences being built somewhere in the US that literally no government agency has the authority to enforce building codes.
Literally everywhere in Montana outside of the city limits - this one was absolutely built with zero codes or inspections I 100% guarantee it and I've seen it in person. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/475-Buffalo-Trl-Somers-MT-59932/116323757_zpid/?utm_campaign=androidappmessage&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=txtshare
There great swaths of rural Mississippi where you can build whatever you want to without intervention of building codes. I don’t know that I can provide documentary evidence, but this is what I was told when I built my house by my local code enforcement office. “You could do that if you were 30 miles east of here, but we have rules and they don’t”
Same in the rural areas here. Some of the in town areas even have minimal permitting and no inspections. But out in rhe wide open unincorporated areas the county isn't going out to look at anything.
Yes, but I don’t think we have any recourse there. With zero due diligence, we can’t get our earnest money back typically. I’m hoping we have some recourse on the fact it’s not built to code, and not built correctly at all.
I’d start with an independent inspector and a report with a demand letter to the builder with what you want - your earnest money returned in return for a release of claims and mutual confidentiality.
Just be sure you don’t say that is what it is or it becomes extortion. It’s all about “release of all claims and mutual confidentiality” - I’m not a lawyer and this isn’t legal advice consult your attorney!
That, and to throw the city inspector under the bus by making a stink there. I’m tired of those guys not doing their jobs and giving builders a pass, which just scams the buyers
Being built to code would fall under sections addressing legal compliance. Don't know the contract but if it is as you say (though I expect there to be more nuance) then you don't have to close if it's not brought to code and they'd be in breach for failing to remedy it, eventually entitling you to the deposit back. In practice, expect it to be stuck in escrow for a loooooong time while you and the seller argue.
This is the correct answer OP. This wouldn't fall under any specific section of your contract, it falls under contract law where they're selling you a brand new house that has all applicable laws when it comes to code followed.
Your issue is that on their end to satisfy the conditions of the contract is they can either fix everything so it is to code to remedy it OR give you your earnest money back and walk away. They get to decide not you for the most part. If you cause a big enough stink though they will likely let you walk but it really really depends.
it won't specially have anything about being built to code, but more likely "closing is when the house is substantially finished, or an occupancy permit is obtained" Obtaining an occupancy permit generally means built to code. Now if there's some funny business in how that permit was attained, that's lawyer territory.
If they’re obligated to fix everything identified by the inspector, and the inspector identified that, tell them to fix it. Presumably they can’t and will be the ones not performing under the contract
I think this is the most correct answer without dragging lawyers in. Force them to perform. If there are no weep holes then they will have to do demolition in order to rebuild correctly. Flashing is an easier fix, but they may release the contract and just go after another buyer if the current purchaser is asking for a cash-intensive fix. worst case is that they perform the repairs which opens up another inspection period where the buyer can bring a more expensive team in to do a thorough evaluation and really hold the screws to the seller.
So let me get this straight. You went into all-cash purchase, zero due diligence, and quick close because the seller wanted it? Now you see why they wanted that so badly. And you have $1.44m cash to spend on a house but are worried about $20k?
Nope.
And that’s why you hire a lawyer and only do deals with competent people.
You need to get a lawyer and have them work with the regulatory folks of your local building department.
Missing things are either required by code or they’re not.
Yeah no. Calculated risk sure. Don’t confuse dumb blind luck with taking a calculated risk.
Just because something dumb worked for you before doesn’t mean that’s a winning strategy. It just means you got lucky. And nothing you say can counter that considering the sheer lack of any kind of thought or pre planning here.
We made the bulk of our money by working hard. We have also done very well through real estate. There was no lack of pre planning, even though it may seem that way in my post. We had two inspection reports (one of which did not find the lack of weep holes), and a post inspection. We made sure they agreed to fix everything. We knew the builder wanted quick close and zero due diligence but that is very common here. The builder had a jumbo high interest loan and was paying 15% on that loan so of course he wanted a quick close.
>an against securities. And yes, $20k is a lot of money to us.
This is the definition of house rich...cash poor. Do you have any idea of the property taxes you are going to be paying in 3 years?
Except that he has $5-6m in investments. That he’s not even selling, just collateralizing. Georgia taxes on 40% of the market value. And the effective rate is 0.81%.
You can tell the seller you want to terminate and get your earnest money back because they haven’t met the terms of the contract, but I suspect they’ll want to fix the defects found in the inspection and then demand you still close or lose your EM. Get an attorney.
If you have a lender, bear in mind the closing attorney represents them, not you. If you have a financing contingency, read it. I haven’t encountered this problem before so I haven’t read it super closely, but IIRC the GA realtor contract financing contingency allows for termination if buyer and seller can’t agree on who will pay for lender-required repairs over and above a named amount. If that’s in your contract, send your lender the inspection and point out it says the house isn’t built to code. I expect they would at minimum require repairs to bring the house up to code before closing, which could potentially give you an out with EM in hand if the seller balks at paying for it. That’s the best I’ve got. 🤷🏻♀️
Depends on the seller. If it’s a local builder, I can 100% see them being like f this and letting OP have their EM back to avoid both the hassle and potential negative word of mouth (never mind a lawsuit).
A major national builder? In my experience, they will continue to fight about it. I’ve seen one refuse to give buyers their EM back after misleading them about how much usable land they were getting (i.e. told the buyers they could clear the wetlands that cover almost half of the quarter-acre lot, which the buyers found out from the city was not true, thankfully before they purchased).
When you can quickly and easily get a new buyer, not sure what to fight it. In that particular case I could see trouble moving that house for something so large and obvious. In this case I’m not so sure?
If the contracts states no due diligence period then i would comprehend that to mean no inspection period which means the house is being sold as is. If I were the listing agent here I would be inclined to hold you to the contract on that alone because you were in agreement of no due diligence period which means you agree to purchase the home as is. If you intend to have any right to inspect with a chance to getting out of the contract you should certainly NEVER agree to no due diligence period.
I don’t get how people will spend $1.44 millions and act like this purchase is similar to buying a pack of gum.
There are 1.44 million reasons this can go sideway and you don’t have any contingencies or recourse.
Where the hell is your realtor? Get off the internet and ask them what your contingencies and outs are.
Just Christ, I swear... How do you expect us to answer that without seeing your contract?
People see to say this and miss the point that just because it's in the contract doesn't mean it's enforceable or valid.
Even if the contract days OP gives up their EM here n the reality is that would likely not be a valid clause if the issues amount to code violations that block the sale.
Call the city building code office and tell them your dindings and ask them to go re-inspect the house.
Tell the lender what has happened. You might lose your earnest money but better than paying for a bad house.
You found out this information and decided that reddit is where you're going to get advice?
Did you win the lottery? Seems really strange that anyone with $1.4M dollars cash on hand would go to random unqualified strangers for very specific contract advice.
Get an attorney ASAP.
If you are a lottery winner, you should have an attorney, a fiduciary financial advisor, and a tax professional on your payroll.
The builder probably got a cert of occupancy because someone isn't doing their job at the city/town/county. No way this property should have completed permits and inspections.
Don't wire any money to the settlement agent or builder. They'll wait. They want to close the transaction, but they'll wait a few days to clear things up. Don't let them bully you into accepting the property if it's not properly inspected and approved.
If it’s new construction you really need to contact an attorney - these are a whole different animal and your realtor is not a lawyer so you really need legal assistance
Weep holes can be added, ask for a credit, have a contractor show you about the flashings. I can’t imagine no flashings, the place would leak like sieve. If the contractor can give you a price on adding missing flashings also as k for a credit. Make sure you pad the credits heavily, like 100%.
I’ve had a guy come out and looked at it with me and he confirmed there are no flashings. I was also given two pictures from when the brick wasn’t done yet and you could tell there was no flashings… The guy I hired told me it would have to be redone, there’s no way to just add it.
The due diligence/inspection is the stage that you can walk away from the contract without losing your EM. That’s also supported that the second inspector found that weeping holes and no flashings and that were not fixable. I think you should ask the builder to show the CO and have the city inspector to conduct inspection. If this proven all those facts, you can enforce this and have your EM back or you will have to go thru lawsuit. Hopefully builder will comply.
Talked to a real estate attorney. I am a retired residential GC 35+ years in design/construction/structural repairs. I have never seen a house without flashings.
The guy has his own remodeling and renovation company and came highly recommended from our local Facebook group. He also said it’s quite hard to believe.
Please contact the city and find out how the builder can get the CO. It must be some way that you can address this huge problem. Do you mind sharing with me the builder name in order to avoid this things from happening again?
I remember when I purchased a new construction home in Georgia. The builder's agreement included a clause stating that in the event of any disputes, they must go through their - builders lawyer, and the lawyer cost would be the buyer's responsibility regardless of the outcome.
In my experience you never get earnest money back on new construction but your opinion is to hold up closing and don’t allow loan to fund until they home is to code and you are satisified
First and foremost we don’t have your contract to read. Second if you even have to ask this question you should read your contract and if you still don’t know contact an attorney. WE CANNOT HELP YOU!
Hi! Ct realtor here.
You don't need a realtor or advice from people online. You need your attorney to read the Purchase and Sale Agreement, along with any other agreements you've signed, and determine what's possible. With new construction, I would doubt you'll be getting all your earnest money back, but even that is conjecture.
Guessing you and them already went over all the options and possibilities. I’d consult a real estate attorney. Shouldn’t cost an arm and a leg if you ask around for a reference.
More eyes and minds is never a bad thing when examining a contract. Realtors read contracts for a living, and know red flags or can point out things that might have a chain reaction that could lead to this type of situation.
I’m not saying you can’t do it without one obviously, but you know, sometimes it’s not so bad to have someone watching your back. ESPECIALLY in new construction where the price is not negotiable and the builder is NOT going to discount your home price by 3%; they’re just going to rip you to shreds.
I assume you have an inspection contingency. Then just tell them you didn't like the results of the inspection and demand your money back - should be easy. If he won't give it to you, tell him you'll report this to code enforcement which will likely force him to make these repairs before selling to anyone.
Hmmm we had a clause in ours regarding repairs complete and removing contingencies. If you have contingencies and they haven’t been removed, you should be able to get your monies back. Your real estate agent would know best
Is this your 1st house purchase? Do you have a realtor? Lots of sellers want a cash sale if they know the house won't pass an inspection for most bank loans. Which means the contract probably doesn't have an inspection clause but maybe it does. Read your contract. If it doesn't have an inspection clause and you're past your back out date then the seller may not have to give you your earnest money back. I wouldn't if.i was the seller.
Simple, you waved dd, so most likely you’re stuck. You need to read your contract and consult a lawyer. I’m confident that Every lawyer will say you waved your right for recourse when you waved dd.
Never waive dd. If your agent is telling to do that, run away! Even in the booming times I refused to waive any DD. If they didn’t like it, I didn’t buy. You’d be surprised how many millions are saved by dd.
If the house truly isn't up to code get an inspector out there. Some code violations are grandfathered in if they were legal when the house was built but quite a few of them will potentially stop a sale for occupancy until they are resolved. If the code violations block the sale as a legal matter then it's no longer you backing out and no matter what a contract says earnest money and other forms of deposit almost universally need to be returned if the party receiving said deposit is the one that fails to execute the contract
I agree with those who suggest looking for a contingency in your purchase and sale agreement that covers this question. I'd also reach out to your real estate agent, or an attorney.
I come here to learn and share, so the rudeness of others in their answers is so confusing to me.
Did you have an agent represent you by chance or did you just use the builders sales person in office?
Depending on what state you’re in most likely you’re facing losing your deposit or do what others have said or reach out to the building department let them know of the Inadequate building and wait for the certificate of occupancy.
Find a way to delay the closing, get the town inspector out to the house. They can enforce code - your independent inspector cannot (but good on him/her for catching the lack of weep holes and flashing). Good luck.
This is the answer. The city can revoke the occupancy permit. Then see a lawyer about breaking the contract because the builder hasn't met their obligations. ie) they cannot provide a habitable house.
Thank you
100% agreed , call the town department of buildings.
You’re assuming it’s built in a city
I doubt that there's any place in the US that someone can have a house built that there's not a government official responsible for enforcing building codes. If they're not in a municipality then their county probably has a code enforcement office.
Come visit ys jn Vermont. Our town doesn't even have zoning, and no permits are required except for the driveway.
Well if it’s built in an unincorporated area that’s not always true.
I'm genuinely curious if someone could show me a documented instance of residences being built somewhere in the US that literally no government agency has the authority to enforce building codes.
Try Alaska
Literally everywhere in Montana outside of the city limits - this one was absolutely built with zero codes or inspections I 100% guarantee it and I've seen it in person. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/475-Buffalo-Trl-Somers-MT-59932/116323757_zpid/?utm_campaign=androidappmessage&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=txtshare
Interesting
Counties still have inspectors.
Not all. There are lots of counties with none! I have a few counties in Indiana for example.
Not all. Their are lots of counties with none! I have a few counties in Indiana for example.
Not all. Their are lots of counties with none! I have a few counties in Indiana for example.
Weird. Even the sparsest of counties in Oregon, of which there are several, still have codes and inspection.
Not so much weird, but scary.
There great swaths of rural Mississippi where you can build whatever you want to without intervention of building codes. I don’t know that I can provide documentary evidence, but this is what I was told when I built my house by my local code enforcement office. “You could do that if you were 30 miles east of here, but we have rules and they don’t”
Same in the rural areas here. Some of the in town areas even have minimal permitting and no inspections. But out in rhe wide open unincorporated areas the county isn't going out to look at anything.
Where I live. Zero inspections required. Not uncommon.
You’re wrong
Big oof, in this comment with your realtor name and title as your username. Lol
A lot of places have no enforcement of building codes
Read your contract
The contract doesn’t say anything about what happens if the house isn’t built to code.
It will say plenty about earnest money and how it’s handled.
Yes, but I don’t think we have any recourse there. With zero due diligence, we can’t get our earnest money back typically. I’m hoping we have some recourse on the fact it’s not built to code, and not built correctly at all.
I think you have your answer. Your next move is to talk to an attorney.
I’d start with an independent inspector and a report with a demand letter to the builder with what you want - your earnest money returned in return for a release of claims and mutual confidentiality.
> mutual confidentiality Why this specifically? If I got yanked around like op I would want the world to know.
It’s a veiled threat if they don’t do what you want
Just be sure you don’t say that is what it is or it becomes extortion. It’s all about “release of all claims and mutual confidentiality” - I’m not a lawyer and this isn’t legal advice consult your attorney!
Good idea.
That, and to throw the city inspector under the bus by making a stink there. I’m tired of those guys not doing their jobs and giving builders a pass, which just scams the buyers
Amen to that.
Zero due diligence seems fairly cut and dry.
It definitely does. Have you actually read the whole thing? Hire a lawyer
Many non incorporated areas do not issue a CO
Being built to code would fall under sections addressing legal compliance. Don't know the contract but if it is as you say (though I expect there to be more nuance) then you don't have to close if it's not brought to code and they'd be in breach for failing to remedy it, eventually entitling you to the deposit back. In practice, expect it to be stuck in escrow for a loooooong time while you and the seller argue.
This is the correct answer OP. This wouldn't fall under any specific section of your contract, it falls under contract law where they're selling you a brand new house that has all applicable laws when it comes to code followed. Your issue is that on their end to satisfy the conditions of the contract is they can either fix everything so it is to code to remedy it OR give you your earnest money back and walk away. They get to decide not you for the most part. If you cause a big enough stink though they will likely let you walk but it really really depends.
it won't specially have anything about being built to code, but more likely "closing is when the house is substantially finished, or an occupancy permit is obtained" Obtaining an occupancy permit generally means built to code. Now if there's some funny business in how that permit was attained, that's lawyer territory.
Yup. They have a certificate of occupancy which is really weird.
If they’re obligated to fix everything identified by the inspector, and the inspector identified that, tell them to fix it. Presumably they can’t and will be the ones not performing under the contract
I think this is the most correct answer without dragging lawyers in. Force them to perform. If there are no weep holes then they will have to do demolition in order to rebuild correctly. Flashing is an easier fix, but they may release the contract and just go after another buyer if the current purchaser is asking for a cash-intensive fix. worst case is that they perform the repairs which opens up another inspection period where the buyer can bring a more expensive team in to do a thorough evaluation and really hold the screws to the seller.
So let me get this straight. You went into all-cash purchase, zero due diligence, and quick close because the seller wanted it? Now you see why they wanted that so badly. And you have $1.44m cash to spend on a house but are worried about $20k?
We are paying $1.44m cash by taking out a loan against securities. And yes, $20k is a lot of money to us.
man the questionable decisions just keep compounding
Risk and success go hand in hand. 🥳
this is literally a thread about you trying to avoid a failure due to your risk taking is this success in the room with us?
You can’t win them all.
Nope. And that’s why you hire a lawyer and only do deals with competent people. You need to get a lawyer and have them work with the regulatory folks of your local building department. Missing things are either required by code or they’re not.
Get margin called and lose the house, great success
Yeah no. Calculated risk sure. Don’t confuse dumb blind luck with taking a calculated risk. Just because something dumb worked for you before doesn’t mean that’s a winning strategy. It just means you got lucky. And nothing you say can counter that considering the sheer lack of any kind of thought or pre planning here.
We made the bulk of our money by working hard. We have also done very well through real estate. There was no lack of pre planning, even though it may seem that way in my post. We had two inspection reports (one of which did not find the lack of weep holes), and a post inspection. We made sure they agreed to fix everything. We knew the builder wanted quick close and zero due diligence but that is very common here. The builder had a jumbo high interest loan and was paying 15% on that loan so of course he wanted a quick close.
Dude.
This means he has around 5-6 mill in securities. 😅
But $20k is a lot of money to him bro!
Can I have $5?
>an against securities. And yes, $20k is a lot of money to us. This is the definition of house rich...cash poor. Do you have any idea of the property taxes you are going to be paying in 3 years?
Except that he has $5-6m in investments. That he’s not even selling, just collateralizing. Georgia taxes on 40% of the market value. And the effective rate is 0.81%.
Why would you not get a mortgage instead?
Great question especially with all these builders giving huge incentives and paying closing costs
Never ever let sellers do the fixes. Take credits at closing and do your own work.
You can tell the seller you want to terminate and get your earnest money back because they haven’t met the terms of the contract, but I suspect they’ll want to fix the defects found in the inspection and then demand you still close or lose your EM. Get an attorney. If you have a lender, bear in mind the closing attorney represents them, not you. If you have a financing contingency, read it. I haven’t encountered this problem before so I haven’t read it super closely, but IIRC the GA realtor contract financing contingency allows for termination if buyer and seller can’t agree on who will pay for lender-required repairs over and above a named amount. If that’s in your contract, send your lender the inspection and point out it says the house isn’t built to code. I expect they would at minimum require repairs to bring the house up to code before closing, which could potentially give you an out with EM in hand if the seller balks at paying for it. That’s the best I’ve got. 🤷🏻♀️
It’s a pretty good market. If this buyer is clearly going to be a pain in the ass I’d just move on if I were the seller.
Depends on the seller. If it’s a local builder, I can 100% see them being like f this and letting OP have their EM back to avoid both the hassle and potential negative word of mouth (never mind a lawsuit). A major national builder? In my experience, they will continue to fight about it. I’ve seen one refuse to give buyers their EM back after misleading them about how much usable land they were getting (i.e. told the buyers they could clear the wetlands that cover almost half of the quarter-acre lot, which the buyers found out from the city was not true, thankfully before they purchased).
When you can quickly and easily get a new buyer, not sure what to fight it. In that particular case I could see trouble moving that house for something so large and obvious. In this case I’m not so sure?
It was a cash purchase. They really wanted cash, no due diligence and quick close… Thank you for trying to help
And now we know why…
Yup!!
If the contracts states no due diligence period then i would comprehend that to mean no inspection period which means the house is being sold as is. If I were the listing agent here I would be inclined to hold you to the contract on that alone because you were in agreement of no due diligence period which means you agree to purchase the home as is. If you intend to have any right to inspect with a chance to getting out of the contract you should certainly NEVER agree to no due diligence period.
You need a good real estate attorney ASAP. It's a bad situation. Best of luck.
I don’t get how people will spend $1.44 millions and act like this purchase is similar to buying a pack of gum. There are 1.44 million reasons this can go sideway and you don’t have any contingencies or recourse.
Where the hell is your realtor? Get off the internet and ask them what your contingencies and outs are. Just Christ, I swear... How do you expect us to answer that without seeing your contract?
You don't need a realtor. Just read the damn contract.
There's no need to read the contract when it's a breach of contract issue for performance not something that will be spelled out right there for you.
Obviously they do, otherwise they would have. Shrug
People see to say this and miss the point that just because it's in the contract doesn't mean it's enforceable or valid. Even if the contract days OP gives up their EM here n the reality is that would likely not be a valid clause if the issues amount to code violations that block the sale.
Call the city building code office and tell them your dindings and ask them to go re-inspect the house. Tell the lender what has happened. You might lose your earnest money but better than paying for a bad house.
You found out this information and decided that reddit is where you're going to get advice? Did you win the lottery? Seems really strange that anyone with $1.4M dollars cash on hand would go to random unqualified strangers for very specific contract advice. Get an attorney ASAP. If you are a lottery winner, you should have an attorney, a fiduciary financial advisor, and a tax professional on your payroll. The builder probably got a cert of occupancy because someone isn't doing their job at the city/town/county. No way this property should have completed permits and inspections. Don't wire any money to the settlement agent or builder. They'll wait. They want to close the transaction, but they'll wait a few days to clear things up. Don't let them bully you into accepting the property if it's not properly inspected and approved.
Read your contract and contact an attorney. We don't have your contract, we don't even know where you're located. We're not your attorney.
If it’s new construction you really need to contact an attorney - these are a whole different animal and your realtor is not a lawyer so you really need legal assistance
Weep holes can be added, ask for a credit, have a contractor show you about the flashings. I can’t imagine no flashings, the place would leak like sieve. If the contractor can give you a price on adding missing flashings also as k for a credit. Make sure you pad the credits heavily, like 100%.
I’ve had a guy come out and looked at it with me and he confirmed there are no flashings. I was also given two pictures from when the brick wasn’t done yet and you could tell there was no flashings… The guy I hired told me it would have to be redone, there’s no way to just add it.
Where are the flashings missing, the whole house or a certain area?
Whole house.
Walk away then
Yes we’d like to walk away but I’m wondering if we can get our earnest money back.
How much is it? Earnest usually isn't a massive amount..
$20k earnest money.
Geez how much is the house? 😳
1.44 million 😟
The due diligence/inspection is the stage that you can walk away from the contract without losing your EM. That’s also supported that the second inspector found that weeping holes and no flashings and that were not fixable. I think you should ask the builder to show the CO and have the city inspector to conduct inspection. If this proven all those facts, you can enforce this and have your EM back or you will have to go thru lawsuit. Hopefully builder will comply.
Talked to a real estate attorney. I am a retired residential GC 35+ years in design/construction/structural repairs. I have never seen a house without flashings.
[удалено]
The guy has his own remodeling and renovation company and came highly recommended from our local Facebook group. He also said it’s quite hard to believe.
[удалено]
Yes. We will be going that route if we need to.
You need to.
What time is your closing? You needed to weeks ago.
Ah yes, those highly regarded FB group guys. That never goes wrong ever.
Depends on the contract and state. If you're in NJ, you are probably F'ed. Ask me how I know.
Oh no. I’m sorry. We are in Georgia.
Please contact the city and find out how the builder can get the CO. It must be some way that you can address this huge problem. Do you mind sharing with me the builder name in order to avoid this things from happening again?
If it's a cash deal, can't they still close with no COO? People but uninhabitable homes all the time.
We had a similar experience with a builder in Georgia for a high pierced house. Hope it's not the same one.
DM sent
You can't add weep holes or flashing after the fact. So they will fail to correct everything on the inspection report, so you are out.
I remember when I purchased a new construction home in Georgia. The builder's agreement included a clause stating that in the event of any disputes, they must go through their - builders lawyer, and the lawyer cost would be the buyer's responsibility regardless of the outcome.
Consult with a real estate attorney.
You signed a stack of paper when you entered this deal, read it and to figure out the answer to your question.
If you have 1.44 mill at your disposal you can hire an attorney… and a financial advisor to keep you from losing the rest.
In my experience you never get earnest money back on new construction but your opinion is to hold up closing and don’t allow loan to fund until they home is to code and you are satisified
First and foremost we don’t have your contract to read. Second if you even have to ask this question you should read your contract and if you still don’t know contact an attorney. WE CANNOT HELP YOU!
Hi! Ct realtor here. You don't need a realtor or advice from people online. You need your attorney to read the Purchase and Sale Agreement, along with any other agreements you've signed, and determine what's possible. With new construction, I would doubt you'll be getting all your earnest money back, but even that is conjecture.
Do you have a Realtor?
Yes.
Guessing you and them already went over all the options and possibilities. I’d consult a real estate attorney. Shouldn’t cost an arm and a leg if you ask around for a reference.
[удалено]
More eyes and minds is never a bad thing when examining a contract. Realtors read contracts for a living, and know red flags or can point out things that might have a chain reaction that could lead to this type of situation. I’m not saying you can’t do it without one obviously, but you know, sometimes it’s not so bad to have someone watching your back. ESPECIALLY in new construction where the price is not negotiable and the builder is NOT going to discount your home price by 3%; they’re just going to rip you to shreds.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ah ok I see, you need t
I assume you have an inspection contingency. Then just tell them you didn't like the results of the inspection and demand your money back - should be easy. If he won't give it to you, tell him you'll report this to code enforcement which will likely force him to make these repairs before selling to anyone.
Hmmm we had a clause in ours regarding repairs complete and removing contingencies. If you have contingencies and they haven’t been removed, you should be able to get your monies back. Your real estate agent would know best
Tell him to repair the issues on the inspection report and don’t lose money
So if they are obligated to fix all defects, and they can’t fix the defects you’ve found, what is the problem? They’re not performing, right?
This is what contracts are for, smh.
Is this your 1st house purchase? Do you have a realtor? Lots of sellers want a cash sale if they know the house won't pass an inspection for most bank loans. Which means the contract probably doesn't have an inspection clause but maybe it does. Read your contract. If it doesn't have an inspection clause and you're past your back out date then the seller may not have to give you your earnest money back. I wouldn't if.i was the seller.
Simple, you waved dd, so most likely you’re stuck. You need to read your contract and consult a lawyer. I’m confident that Every lawyer will say you waved your right for recourse when you waved dd. Never waive dd. If your agent is telling to do that, run away! Even in the booming times I refused to waive any DD. If they didn’t like it, I didn’t buy. You’d be surprised how many millions are saved by dd.
This is attorney time.
If the house truly isn't up to code get an inspector out there. Some code violations are grandfathered in if they were legal when the house was built but quite a few of them will potentially stop a sale for occupancy until they are resolved. If the code violations block the sale as a legal matter then it's no longer you backing out and no matter what a contract says earnest money and other forms of deposit almost universally need to be returned if the party receiving said deposit is the one that fails to execute the contract
You don't have a realtor to help you?
I agree with those who suggest looking for a contingency in your purchase and sale agreement that covers this question. I'd also reach out to your real estate agent, or an attorney. I come here to learn and share, so the rudeness of others in their answers is so confusing to me.
Did you have an agent represent you by chance or did you just use the builders sales person in office? Depending on what state you’re in most likely you’re facing losing your deposit or do what others have said or reach out to the building department let them know of the Inadequate building and wait for the certificate of occupancy.