Search results

Still thinking about the puzzle of the referral. I still find it hard to believe that somewhere along the line, an agent didn't meet face to face with the client to qualify them. Maybe things are just done differently in some areas. Here in Canada, across the board, there is legislation in place...

My point was that I don't. :) I wasn't explaining it to you, I was asking.

Ponderings, I'm a little bit out of my league with what you and Lois and Lala are onto. From what I know about key words, though, by choosing 'air guns' or "GUNS" as keywords, the site will attract users that are interested in guns, not landscaping? So what would that imply?

As always, Lois,... incredible sleuthing. I had no idea the web could do that!

I believe WS is a forum for discussion, where participants abide by certain TOS while they debate and investigate and discuss and share their knowledge. As a result, it is a convenient place for you to pop in and access links to the cases that you are interested in. Tragic that you have to...

As stated upthread, a referral can come from a past client or another agent, even a mortgage broker or a banker.

I'm not sure which post you are referring to, Tink'. The one by deugertni, about mortgages totalling a million dollars on a property that sold for $750,000? I don't see how that would protect the new owner's interest...he has maxed out property as far as borrowing on it.

I worked in a fast paced booming market in western Canada for 30 years, for a large multi-national US based real estate company that rhymes with me/max. Meeting and interviewing clients in the safety of your office saves a lot of time in the long run, and separates the wheat from the chafe ...

It is policy now to have buyers meet first in the office, first to qualify their intentions and their ability to buy, (which I would hope all professionals do, always...) I always made these appointments during business hours where other agents and admin staff would be present. The buyers have...

Maybe the new owners had plans for the lot and went to the bank with a plan to build a 4 plex, so the bank upped the mortgage amount. It wouldn't have anything to do with the L's. I don't think we need to speculate about any of this beyond the Liknes' ownership.

If the seller is not paying their mortgage but is collecting rent from tenants, that money goes to the mortgage company. I don't even see how it would apply in the case of a lawyer purchasing the home and the previous owners renting it back for 6 months. We might be going around in circles for...

My understanding of a caveat is that it is placed on the title, to insure that anyone with a financial interest in the equity will be paid when the home is sold. Interest in the property means financial interest, as in a bank having a mortgage against it, or a real estate company that is not...

Oh...If the L's were selling their home privately, this caveat could be to insure that they did not attempt to sell the home 'twice'. Some For Sale by Owners have done this, written up and accepted two or more unconditional offers. It's doubtful that Kathryn would have done this with her...

It is illegal to transfer sole ownership to your partner but people do posture for bankruptcy, sometimes years ahead of the event. I don't want to speculate about the deceased, some couples have unconventional agreements about who owns what.

I meant the purchaser who happens to be a lawyer. If you want to place a caveat on a property I believe you have to be an unpaid builder/renovator/contractor, or a financial institution holding a mortgage or secured loan...and you would need a lawyer to do it for you.

Yes, the closing date is when funds are in the hands of the seller's lawyer, the date specified on the purchase agreement. So the Caveat re; Rents and Leases would insure that rent would be paid. Maybe in advance. However, I always understood these types of agreements don't "survive" closing...

But early on, we learned that funds were transferred sometime before the closing of the sale. The couple were renting the home back, were they not? In another possible scenario, the lawyer/purchaser released a portion of the funds but title did not transfer until closing date, which I believe...

The caveat would prevent transfer of title to another person, until a mortgage was disbursed or some other obligation was met, in my understanding... but an accepted offer to purchase would need to exist between the L's and the lawyer (caveator). So no, as long as they owned the home, the L's...

The caveat issue is no more or less relevant than the layout of the house, or the Likenes family tree, as far as we know. I have thought as you have over some of the issues that have been discussed here, and sometimes I get the willies about the things that have been disected, right down to...

yep...