Back out from an offer

[TomSanders]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

We are looking to buy a property and we found one (on the internet) that we really like. We love the neighborhood too. But we could not get a chance to go inside to see the property because the selling agent did not return the phone calls and emails of our agent. Our agent said it is probably because the property is very popular and many people want to see it. So the selling agent is tired of showing it since they might have received multiple offers already. Our agent advised that we should go ahead to make an offer first. And then if there is anything about the property that we do not like after we have a chance to see it in the future, we can always back out from the offer without after loss or penalty, even after the seller has accepted the offer. This agent is a good friend of us so we really trust her. But still, we want to have second opinion to confirm we can really back out from the offer easily if we find out anything about the property that we do not like in the future. We honestly do not know anything about real estate laws. So we hope the knowledgeable members here can give us their opinion. Thank you.

 

[Zigner]

That would depend entirely on the terms of your offer.

 

[justalayman]

I have to presume that either the home is not listed with an MLS associated brokerage or your agent is not associated with MLS. If they both were, whether it is under contract or not would be available via the MLS site. Often times a lockbox is used to secure a key at the residence as well so unless there specific instructions that the property is not to be viewed with the listing agent, any MLS associated Realtor can access the property.


Personal opinion: making an offer without viewing the property is like buying a car without driving it. It may look great on the outside but who knows what it's like under the hood.

You would have to craft your offer extremely well for it to be able to be terminated at your desire and yet still make it attractive to the seller. That's a hard thing to do. If you make a million contingencies, the seller would likely toss out the contract as too complex to bother with. If you don't craft it properly, you may end up obligating yourself and find there are problems you didn't address.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

You would have to craft your offer extremely well for it to be able to be terminated at your desire and yet still make it attractive to the seller. That's a hard thing to do.

I think the point would be to let the listing agent know that you are really interested, and at the same time throw him/her under the bus by presenting an offer and indicating that you have been unable to view the property.

A simple contingency for a 'satisfactory showing within three days of presenting the offer' should suffice, particularly if the offer doesn't expire for four days.

 

[justalayman]

A simple contingency for a 'satisfactory showing within three days of presenting the offer' should suffice, particularly if the offer doesn't expire for four days.

If I was a seller, I wouldn't even entertain such an offer. If you didn't inspect the house to some degree prior to the offer, I would not consider it worth anything.


On top of that, that "satisfactory" issue is so wide open, it is essentially not binding on the buyer so again, I would toss the offer in the trash. Why would I ever waste my time with an offer of; we have a right to terminate if we want...period.

You seem to be under the impression the selling agent isn't doing their job. The fact is; there is nothing to show that. For all we know there are 12 offers on the table, maybe even a signed offer. It is just that the buyers agent doesn't know what is going on.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Make the offer contingent on your approval of aspects you cannot currently see. The agent will know you are serious and if the offer is good enough, attempt to get your approval and a sale.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

You seem to be under the impression the selling agent isn't doing their job.

You're right - I am under that impression, since OP wrote "the selling agent did not return the phone calls and emails of our agent."

 

[justalayman]

You're right - I am under that impression, since OP wrote "the selling agent did not return the phone calls and emails of our agent."

How does that suggest the selling agent isn't doing their job? Of course you know there isn't an existing offer or contract, right?


You nor I have any idea of the situation and relationship between the seller and their agent. As said before, the offers you guys are suggesting would get an "it isn't worth considering" from me as an agent to the seller. Then tossed aside.

Make the offer contingent on your approval of aspects you cannot currently see. The agent will know you are serious and if the offer is good enough, attempt to get your approval and a sale.

sure:

outside looks great. I'll buy it as long as the inside is acceptable.

That is what is known as a window shopper.



Unless they have a 100%+ offer, cash, with no other contingencies, and a really large earnest money deposit that offer wouldn't get any traction. And then it would have about a 1 day limit from the sellers side.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Of course you know there isn't an existing offer or contract, right?

Yup. Using the same crystal ball that you used to see that there is an existing contract.

the offers you guys are suggesting would get an "it isn't worth considering" from me as an agent to the seller. Then tossed aside.

Which leaves the buyer in no worse position than he is now.

On the other hand, since the listing agent will not respond to the buyer's agent, if the listing agent is not doing his/her job, the offer should provoke an interesting conversation between the listing agent and the seller.

The only downside is the buyer's agent spends the time writing an offer that gets rejected. Since the offer was the buyer agent's idea to begin with, it's the buyer agent's risk.

That is what is known as a window shopper.

This is only a window shopper because the buyer has been shut out.

 

[justalayman]

This is only a window shopper because the buyer has been shut out.

regardless, an offer like that is not taken seriously



A question: if the buyers agent cannot contact the sellers agent, just how do you propose the contract be delivered? You realize, that would be the next step, right?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

regardless, an offer like that is not taken seriously

My intent is to make it more of a last resort to get a showing than a bona fide offer to purchase.

A question: if the buyers agent cannot contact the sellers agent, just how do you propose the contract be delivered? You realize, that would be the next step, right?

Fax it or deliver it to the broker's office.

 

[justalayman]

Stevef;3072348]My intent is to make it more of a last resort to get a showing than a bona fide offer to purchase.

so it is a fraudulent offer? Exactly my point and why it would be looked as as they are window shoppers.

Fax it or deliver it to the broker's office.

don't get me wrong. I understand your intent. It has a lot of inherent problems with it though. Depending on what is happening, it could result souring the seller on any possible future attempt to enter into a contract. The buyers agent simply has to work harder to find out what the situation is before attempting to push their way in with a silly offer. It absolutely should be a last resort attempt and so far, I suspect they have not reached that point. That last comment is obviously speculation but given the buyers agent doesn't seem to know anything and either cannot figure how to get info or simply doesn't want to, I think the buyers agent needs to get to work rather than just suggesting they buyers throw in a junk offer.

I see as much of a problem with the buyers agent here as I do with the sellers agent.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

It absolutely should be a last resort attempt

I agree 100%

 

[tranquility]

"Fraudulent offer"? How can an offer be fraudulent unless the goal is to get money from another? Here, I'd say the magic-back-out clause would indicate there is not an offer. From memory:

"An offer is the outward manifestation of present contractual intent with definite and certain terms relayed to the offeree."

That's not the law, it's just the memory aid I used when assessing what an offer is. If there is no intent to enter into a contract presently (if accepted), I'd say it is not an offer. Same thing with spurious "promises" that allow one side a free escape. If the OP is not going to be bound if he doesn't want to be, then the seller won't be bound either.

 

[justalayman]

tranquility;3072438]"Fraudulent offer"? How can an offer be fraudulent unless the goal is to get money from another? Here, I'd say the magic-back-out clause would indicate there is not an offer.

since when does fraud have to be the attempt to obtain money unlawfully?

I was speaking in the common definition of the term anyway:

a : deceit, trickery; specifically : intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right
b : an act of deceiving or misrepresenting : trick

2
a : a person who is not what he or she pretends to be : impostor; also : one who defrauds : cheat
b : one that is not what it seems or is represented to be