« Nebraska Graduate REALTOR® Institute (GRI) program GRI 105: Real Estate Investment and Management approved for CE Credit! | Main | In Memoriam: Life Lessons: How to Teach Your Kids about Safety and Strangers ~ by Andrew Wooten »

February 27, 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I seems very clear to me.

The lender should be aware of the corrections or potential corrections necessary on the property before closing

This appears to be a logical manner in which to resolve the Inspection Objection.

Thanks for the information.

If both parties can agree that is best, but if the seller reneges then get the court involved and cause a cloud on the title.

In a case where repairs/ improvements are made, I would see the lender as encouraging! The buyer getting more than they bargained for.
In the case study, it appeared an insight into keeping disclosure's from being made to a lender. Sort of a back door approach... This could be problematic.

I read a little into the article of the dangers of a typical "wish list" in alerting a lender to what appears to be a deficient property, when it is merely a wish list.
ei: seller to replace scratched (but unbroken) window. repaint entire interior, replace entire house carpet, etc. etc... I have seen some crazy requests!

I think the Inspection is important for any buyer, lender and seller. Trying to negotiate and resolve issues are huge between parties. Yes, let the lender know as soon as possible and keep them posted on the resolution to keep the contract going on schedule as close as possible or terminate the contract.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Vaned_logo