There's a story behind the failed contract of March 2009: 01/20/2008 Previously Listed by Brown Harris Stevens at $4,950,000. 12/07/2008 Brown Harris Stevens Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $3,999,000. 01/11/2009 Listed by Sotheby's International Realty, Inc. at $3,650,000. 03/05/2009 Listing entered contract. 05/21/2009 Re-listed by Sotheby's International Realty, Inc.. 05/27/2009... [more]
There's a story behind the failed contract of March 2009:
01/20/2008 Previously Listed by Brown Harris Stevens at $4,950,000.
12/07/2008 Brown Harris Stevens Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $3,999,000.
01/11/2009 Listed by Sotheby's International Realty, Inc. at $3,650,000.
03/05/2009 Listing entered contract.
05/21/2009 Re-listed by Sotheby's International Realty, Inc..
05/27/2009 Price decreased by 5% to $3,450,000.
09/02/2009 Listing is no longer available.
09/04/2009 Later Listed by Stribling at $3,450,000.
03/31/2010 Sale recorded for $3,000,000.
Seller refused to return $300K deposit after board turndown, suspecting buyer had second thoughts and botched the interview.
Buyer sued for return of deposit, court said hand it over. Decision at http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/fcas/fcas_docs/2011APR/3001124182009001SCIV.pdf[less]
Response by front_porch
about 15 years ago
Posts: 5325
Member since: Mar 2008
That's fascinating! It certainly raises issues of seller protection. If we live in a world where no seller can prove a candidate "threw" an interview (because I can't imagine a board member ever going on record about that) how do you guard against a buyer tying up your property for four months? Sounds like getting the buyer's intentions about occupancy on record would have helped (and some agents have a questionnaire which does just that). I'm going to mull... thanks NWT.
ali r.
DG Neary Realty
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by inonada
about 15 years ago
Posts: 8085
Member since: Oct 2008
Nice digging, NWT.
The board rejection came 2 months after going into contract, so it wasn't tied up that long. IMO if you own a coop, you are subjected to such vagaries: deal with them accordingly. I skimmed through the decision, and it was a pretty thin case based on hearsay. The seller didn't even name the board member who supposedly told him whatever he claimed, much less get them to sign an affidavit. I'm not saying whether the seller should have forced the board member's hand or not, but to go to court without it is a pretty poor business decision. Seller paid accordingly: $54K in statutory interest, plus legal costs on both sides, so maybe $100K total lost.
That's fascinating! It certainly raises issues of seller protection. If we live in a world where no seller can prove a candidate "threw" an interview (because I can't imagine a board member ever going on record about that) how do you guard against a buyer tying up your property for four months? Sounds like getting the buyer's intentions about occupancy on record would have helped (and some agents have a questionnaire which does just that). I'm going to mull... thanks NWT.
ali r.
DG Neary Realty
Nice digging, NWT.
The board rejection came 2 months after going into contract, so it wasn't tied up that long. IMO if you own a coop, you are subjected to such vagaries: deal with them accordingly. I skimmed through the decision, and it was a pretty thin case based on hearsay. The seller didn't even name the board member who supposedly told him whatever he claimed, much less get them to sign an affidavit. I'm not saying whether the seller should have forced the board member's hand or not, but to go to court without it is a pretty poor business decision. Seller paid accordingly: $54K in statutory interest, plus legal costs on both sides, so maybe $100K total lost.