Almost had a house yesterday...

The seller’s agent didn’t understand the concept of Hard Money ARV loans. Didn’t care that we had funding because he didn’t trust it. He behaved like we were money laundering and it didn’t matter how many times we explained it. :banghead

It would have been such a good deal and a cute little house.

I think if you offer their asking price and don’t ask for terms they are required to accept your offer. Just an idea

It would be foolish not to but don’t think its a law that they have to accept it…

Now that I think about it, I am kind of right about the seller being required, at least in Wisconsin. But I think in Wisconsin where two of my properties are at there is a rule where they are required to accept a full offer with no terms. The terms mean “cash”, no finance contingencies, so your HML won’t work even in Wisconsin.

The agent is STILL required to make the offer to the seller whether they “trust” it or not. If it’s a deal that you wish to pursue, I’d recommend contacting that agent (and if need be, their broker in charge) and ensuring that the offer is/has been made. I’d suggest that you request that you make the offer to the sellers directly (with the agent present of course) just to make sure that the sellers have heard the offer and understand what you are doing.


He did present it to the sellers. His view was that it didn’t seem on the up and up, and that we couldn’t perform. They had another offer on the table, so they accepted that one.

Dont work with realtors. They are not in the real estate business. They are sales people looking out for their own best interest, not yours or the sellers.

work directly with sellers.

Wow, what a blanket statement. The house was listed with a broker, so therefore if we wanted THAT house we had to tolerate the agent. Going around the agent would have put the seller in an unethical position.

We take houses however they come and don’t limit ourselves to one source. It seems silly to me to pass on a house simply because there’s a real estate agent involved.

That’s an interesting concept that the seller is required to accept an offer. I’d be curious to hear more about it.

The basic principle in sales is that the seller determines the selling price. Whichever one is the best offer is the one the seller will accept. If you’re offering something the seller doesn’t understand, they don’t have to accept. They can reject all offers and even raise their asking price like the good old days when there were bidding wars. I still run into those once in a while when a property is property priced. In those instances, the most normal transaction with the most money will win.

Also about 70-80% of homes are sold through Realtors. The seller signs an agreement with the listing firm that says they will be paid a certain % if their house sells. It’s may seem like the best interest for the buyer may be to go around the realtor, but it’s really in the best interest of the seller to use the realtor. So guess who wins in that case? The realtor gets paid whether or not they do their job so why shouldn’t the seller make the realtor earn their money?

How would you go about going around the seller’s realtor anyway? Typically public records just has the owner’s address, not the phone number.

My old Wisconsin Realtor told me that if you make an offer for the full price with no contingiencies (cash deal) then they are required to take that offer. She quit being a Realtor in order to become a cop. I can’t stand those PIGS, and cops are too great either. :biggrin

Saddly we have to use Realtors a lot of the times. I am pretty hard on my Realtors, I let them know I have access to everything on the MLS, I’m looking for alternative methods in finding motivated sellers.

I’d like to see the Wisconsin law that says they have to accept. That would mean some homeless guy that says he has the cash to buy the place could buy it. Even in regular retail, there’s always those signs that says the owner reserves the right to refuse service to anyone.

Being forced to sell something seems counter to everything that this country is based on. Now once you’ve accepted an offer, you could be forced to perform, but having to accept an offer doesn’t sound right. How does this deal with multiple offers where the seller will accept the highest one? Do they then get in trouble for not accepting the cash offer? Just doesn’t sound right to me. Sounds like a myth to me.

Purchasing anything is a contract between 2 parties. Advertising and offering something for sale is like putting your signature on a contract with the price and terms acceptable to you and just waiting for a buyer to come along and sign their name. If you shout in the street, “I’ll sell you my clothes for $5!” and someone says “I accept, here is your $5.” That is a binding verbal agreement between 2 parties. Both parties will have to perform under the agreement or mutually dismiss it, but neither one can legally back out individually. In RE, the Statute of Frauds says all RE agreements must be in writing. So until the agreement is on paper, it doesn’t exist. Agreeing to the sellers offer by saying you’ll buy the property for the amount they were offering is not enough.

Even if verbal agreements for RE were enforceable, there are too many contingencies that you’d want as a buyer to make your position valid. So in most things, offering to buyer’s you’ll sell them your crap for $XXX and having one say they’ll pay you $XXX for it IS a verbal contract, but that doesn’t fly in RE.

I agree, the other key item with the Statue of Frauds is that there must be some kind of consideration with the offer in order for it to be valid. So if there’s no signature by the seller, there’s no acceptance of any offer no matter what the terms or price of the offer was.

On the other hand, the seller could be held liable by the Realtor for their commission if they decide not to sell because the job of the Realtor is to locate a ready, willing and able buyer. In the case where there’s an accepted offer, the Realtor could demand to be paid regardless of whether or not the seller goes though with the sale. That contract is one that the seller signed with the Realtor when the put their house on the market. I’ve talked to a few Realtors where this actually happened and in each case, the Realtor chose not to pursue it because they felt it would create bad blood and that when the seller was really ready to sell, they’d go back to the same Realtor and they’d get their commission eventually.