Welcome to Friday, let’s sweep! | Notes from the Barristers…

Welcome to Friday everyone! A handful of notes from my desk this week with a focus on today – 2020 Battle of the Barristers – my favorite 3 clock hours every single year! Over 600 brokers joined the “battle” virtually this year. For those of you who couldn’t join and are interested in the scenarios that we’re discussed – full outline here…

Let’s take a look at my notes – and remember, I come at these notes thru the lens of a Designated Broker – aka, my goal is to reduce your/our liability. Below is a readers digest of the points I scribbled down. It would be fun to hear what you jotted down too – certainly fantastic office meeting content for days, if not weeks…

NWMLS Form 65B (rental agreement after Closing)| Good reminder for all that once a home is Closed; Seller becomes tenant and Buyer naturally becomes the owner. With that, what governs the two parties moving forward in a rental agreement after Closing? You got it = Landlord Tenant Laws (not the PSA). *also, good reminder as new owner (aka, Buyer) to perform a “move-in and move-out” walkthrough; just as you would with a full lease agreement.

“Closing on or before xx/yy/20XX” | This is ONLY an agreement to agree on the PSA between a buyer and seller. Don’t do it – even if escrow or lender suggests you do. 1. This practice breeds uncertainly for all parties. 2. From the legal lens; it is unenforceable. In fact, you (broker) are engaging in unauthorized practice of law. Again, don’t do it. *And, another friendly plug for not choosing a Friday or the last day of the month for Closing Date.

NWMLS Form 35E (escalation addendum) | As a listing broker, please be sure to review multiple offer scenarios with a keen eye for what is by definition of a “competing offer” – and be sure to escalate winning offer with another offer that absolutely is “competing.” Questions on this? Review paragraph #2 on NWMLS Form 35E.

Form 17 (Seller Disclosure) | When your Seller tells you “I don’t remember…” – it’s true, they just may not. That said, do ask your Seller if there is anything available to them in order to recall? Good practice.

Dual Agency | One of my favorite topics to discuss. Why? Because 1. Washington State allows for us to be a dual agent and 2. because of that, it always give me pause – should we? My personal opinion is that Dual Agency is an oxymoron. Me talking to a client (hypothetical conversation) – “Do you want all of me or do you want part of me when we talk about advocacy?” Can we really serve both parties? Ok, that said – yes, there are situations that arise that (may) make sense. Before you enter into dual agency I’d strongly suggest you touch based with your manager/designated broker to talk out the scenario. It can be done; should be critically evaluated and performed perfectly in written consent, disclosure and agency. And of, if you think you are “only facilitating this transaction” – think again. You are exposed to liabilities. Ok, off my soap box, moving on…

Inspections for “informational purposes only.” (aka, scenarios whereas NWMLS Form 35 or equivalent are not in play). | Just a plain bad idea. Nothing good can really come from this – even with all good intentions going into such agreement with two parties. What if new information is discovered? If so, there is no process or vehicle in place to handle between a buyer and seller.

Ok, for those of you who I captured your attention and you made it to the end of this “legal bite” – let’s move along to the weekend in productive work & play! Here to help, the ultimate goal.

With open houses back in limited capacity; continue to…

Go Slow, Do no Harm. – Laura