Weasel clauses

one that few people are ware of that worsk quite well is too simply have your lender reject your financing before your commitment date is up. For example, if another paystub or bank statement is required prior to loan commitment and you want out, just tell the lender you want out and that for some reason or another you can't provide the last bit of info. If he wants your business the next time around he'll do it; no skin of fhis back, and he will have won your loyalty...

But if someone does back out when there's no weasel clause, what can really be done about it?

we had buyers who, after walking away from the p&s signing after four extensions two hours before it needed to be signed, came back three weeks later with another offer. and they wanted a contingency that stated if the interest rates went up more than 0.25% before the p&s was signed, they could walk away with their deposit.

i said "nah uh, we go straight to a p&s, i am not putting my house under agreement with you people again only to get screwed up again". so we went straight to the p&s, which they signed with no extensions.

the irony? interest rates went up, the house did not appraise out because they NEEDED $10K at closing, and they could not get a mortgage... BEWARE weasel clauses....

"Weasel clause" seems to me to be an unfortunate choice of words. Someone who backs out of an agreement because of a lousy home inspection isn't a weasel.

When I represent a condo buyer I include language that allows for the satisfactory review of condominium documents, including the rules and regulations, master deed, declaration of trust and budget.

There are many other similar clauses an attorney should use on behalf of clients.

I think most buyers do not fully realize that the binding nature of an offer sheet that calls for the execution of a standard purchase and sale agreement at a later date. Buyers often view this affording them an opportunity to "negotiate" the terms of such an agreement. The reality is that if a buyer refuses to sign the standard P&S, the seller can often force the buyer to consummate the transaction on the standard terms (or pay commensurate damages). This is a trap for the unwary, and the problem is that many buyers do not get an attorney until after they submit an offer.

I do not think that contingency clauses are a bad thing. A house is, after all, the largest purchase a person will ever make. As long as everyone understands that the deal has not been finalized, there should not be any problem. Conversely, I don't see the benefit of fostering "deals" based upon a buyer's (and, in some instances, as seller's) misunderstanding over the execution of more formal documents.

hmm. Good advice, but as one who puts weasel clauses into everything (with never an objection) I have mixed feelings about you exposing this.

It is why everyone in a real estate transaction should higher a good lawyer. (In buyers case, BEFORE they make an offer) You certainly don't want the unmodified GBREB contract if you are a buyer...

True story: It's even more fun when you're the buyer and the Seller decides to be too cheap to hire a lawyer.
Then it becomes an endless game of "calling OUR lawyer for legal advice" when that's obviously a conflict of interest. Do you need someone to read the P&S to you? Then pay the flat fee and hire your own lawyer.

You will not, can not and should not eliminate “weasel clauses”. They are there for the protection of the buyer, though some buyers - and I've also seen a few sellers use them -try and "modify" a deal to their benefit.

In your State, a buyer and seller should meet with a Real Estate Attorney prior to buying a home or listing the home on MLS. Both parties need someone to cover their back, for whether or not your Realtor is your best friend, he/she can not give out Legal, property inspection, construction, financial or title opinions out without running the risk of being sued! Realtors shouldn't be placed in the middle and/or offer opinions in areas outside of their expertise.

In many other States and in the State where I am a Realtor, we attempt to minimize “weasel clauses” by having the preliminary title work done and a home and pest inspection done prior to listing the home and placing it on the market. If sellers are truly interested in selling their home, they should pay to have this done upfront, rather than passing off these costs to the buyer and taking a chance that the deal will fall through before close of escrow.

Buyers should not be thought ill of, just because the inspection, title, permit, CLUE report, roof, chimney, radon or any other number of reports come back negative and which are often remedied by the buyer reaching into their wallets to fix the issue if they want the house. Some sellers work with the buyer to resolve the problem, but I've seen countless sellers who don't.

Many of us in the Real Estate industry always see the buyers as the weak link or as the problem, but Sellers are equally to blame - maybe even more so. I very rarely read articles about how Sellers are stalling or preventing the housing market recovery. It is usually always articles about buyers needing to get off the fence and buy a home - it is alway the right time to buy a home - rather than hammering the sellers to lower their prices.

In my opinion, the P&S is should only contain weasel clauses for buyer's inspection (with a time limit and opportunity for seller to cure up to a certain dollar amount) if this hasn't been done already, and for buyer's financing (the mortgage contingency, also with a time limit). These can be tightened up to minimize opportunities for a buyer to back out, but realistically, the financing is between the buyer and his bank, so it's hard for the seller to control that. It's also hard for a buyer to force a seller to sell the house to them if they choose to back out unless the buyer goes to court to force the sale under the purchase agreement. Liquidated damages are also an option--a provision in the P&S that allows seller to retain portion of deposit if buyer backs out.

Sam says......Good discussion here, but I think that there is confiusion between a "weasel clause", which is intentionally inserted as an easy way out of an agreement, and a clause that provides needed protection for one of the parties, such as a mortgage contingency (which could be contested by a good real estate attorney if it was abused by a buyer seeking to get out of an agreement) or an inspection clause.
The reality is that the intentions and level of commitment of the buyer and seller are only as strong as the language in the written agreement and both parties are most likely interested in binding the other side to the agreement as much as possible.

I'm writing an article right now on "weasel Clauses" of a different kind.

These are clauses that title companies use to allow real estate brokers to weasel out of their responsibilities. And these clauses sometimes show up at closings here in Ann Arbor, mixed in with other legit documents.

As An Ann Arbor Real Estate Buyer's Broker I am offended by these clauses and by the real estate companies that try to sneak them into a buyer's closing package.