Comments on: Having second thoughts about that High-End Condo presale?

By: craig

craig — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:40:22 +0000

RJava — I think it certainly is worth it to at least discuss with a lawyer. After determining the approximate cost of getting a lawyer on board so you can make an informed decision (whether by contingency, flat fee, or an estimated amount of hourly work) you can decide whether you want to risk sending good money after bad. If the attorney believes you have a very good chance of getting at least some of the money back, it may be money well worth spending.

Oh, did I mention I was a lawyer? And I am handling many of these cases right now?

By: RJava

RJava — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:17:34 +0000

My friend told me that he hired a lawyer name Steve Crane from Crane Dunham and although he couldn’t tell me the specifics, he said he was pretty happy with the results. It might just be worth it to at least talk to a lawyer. You could always have a contingency fee agreement instead of rates. Just a thought.

By: Breffni

Breffni — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:25:56 +0000

Opus NWR Development LLC, the developer of the Fifteen-Twenty One Second Avenue condominiums, marketed the building as housing the premier condominiums in all of Seattle. However, despite Opus’ representations about the grand scale and spaciousness of the condos, a number of buyers for “A” unit at the building — which was represented to be the best unit carried a matching pricetag — have discovered on their initial walk-throughs that they were hood-winked into reserving the “ugly stepsister” unit of the entire project. Instead of the 8′ foot entry door, open floorplan, and high ceilings they were promised, the buyers of unit A have discovered that the long, narrow entry to the unit is more befitting of an underground bunker that the “spacious living” they were promised (and paid for). As a consequence, several buyers of unit A have retained Dan Donlan of the law firm of Lane Powell to represent them against the developer. In addition to the design problems with unit A that have been admitted by on-site Opus agents, the owners have discovered shoddy workmanship and a laundry list of defects. However, instead of trying to resolve these issues with the tenants, Opus has thus far tried to blame the complaints on current market conditions suggesting the buyers are only complaining because their units are not worth as much as they once were. Despite the suggestion that the buyers are only looking to back out of their deals, none of the buyers has asked for a refund and have only asked to have the defects fixed.

By: SFM

SFM — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:52:55 +0000

Thanks Craig,

I did get an email back from HUD that they have nothing on this subdivision. Interesting that a Canadian buyer into this project was given a Disclosure Statement under Canadian law, being the developer is Canadian. So either they checked with their attorney and determined they would be exempt, or?? they should of resigistered and did not, which I would find hard to believe they would be that dumb, or given bad legal advice. Looks like there might be some anti-fraud requirements, even if they were exempt from this registration.

By: craig

craig — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:20:12 +0000

SFM — we typically check with HUD in Washington DC. They are good about sending a reply email promptly. If the development is not registered, you can safely assume that they believe they are exempt and have written their contract accordingly. In our experience, given the complexity of the law, it is almost always possible to at least craft an argument that the developer has not complied with the exemption and therefore the buyer has a right of rescission.

By: SFM

SFM — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:37:45 +0000

How can anyone verify if a developer is supposed to be registered under the
Interstate Land Sales Disclosure Act? I went to the website, it’s not registered, so either it is exempt or should be regsitered. I called the Seattle and Spokane HUD office and neither knew how to find out?? There is an address to send complaints to in Washington D.C. I will send that, but wondered if there is quicker way to find out (by phone), called the Attorney General and they had no clue?

Thanks

By: christiangustafson

christiangustafson — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:38:44 +0000

My office window looks directly out on Olive8, the fab condo-tel.

OH MY GOD what a disaster it will be. It doesn’t even have a worthwhile view, for crying out loud. Its birth was only made possible by loose lending. Now it will die.

I will post some pics of it in Deflation Land.

By: » Odds and ends: Wysong conversions, water at Mosler, 120 Pike St blocking views - urbnlivn a seattle condos blog

Thu, 06 Mar 2008 06:21:12 +0000

[...] Over at Rain City Guide Craig Blackmon wrote about Having second thoughts about that High-End Condo presale and offers some suggestions: Since every POS changes between the initial, presale version and the final version, a buyer can usually use these changes to negotiate at least a partial return of the earnest money. [...]

By: Kary L. Krismer

Kary L. Krismer — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:03:43 +0000

But in the scenario I wrote about in my first post, they could select forfeiture of earnest money on the first page of the P&S, but still be in an election of remedies situation. It’s a real trap for the unwary.

By: craig

craig — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:47:55 +0000

Kary — an excellent point. The Form 28 (Condo PSA) allows the parties to either choose forfeiture of earnest money or seller election of remedies upon buyer’s default. If the parties have selected “election of remedies,” then that raises the stakes significantly in terms of getting out of the contract. The situation would require additional finesse.