Purchase and Sale Agreements

Contract Deadlines Can Be Waived and Other Cautionary Tales From the Real Estate Trenches

by Rich Vetstein on November 6, 2019

in Closings, Condominium Law, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Offer To Purchase, Purchase and Sale Agreements, Real Estate Litigation

Parties Who Negotiated Past Purchase and Sale Agreement Deadline Waived It, Court Rules

The Massachusetts Appeals Court just came down with a ruling which should be a cautionary tale to everyone in the residential real estate business. It’s an interesting fact pattern, but not necessarily unusual. For those with short attention spans, the Court held that the standard deadline to execute the purchase and sale agreement is not necessarily a hard deadline. Rather, the deadline can be waived by the parties if they negotiate beyond the date, even without a formal extension in place. The Court also held that where the property is owned by several individuals, even if only one of those individuals sign the offer, this is not necessarily fatal to the deal.

Ferguson v. Maxim, Mass. Appeals Court, 18-P-1081 (Nov. 6, 2019)

In the case, the buyer, David Ferguson, and the seller, Joyce Maxim, signed the standard form Offer to Purchase put out by the Massachusetts Association of Realtors for the sale of residential property in Leominster. (For my post comparing the MAR form with the Greater Boston Real Estate Board, click here). It turns out that title to the property was actually held by a group of five individuals including Maxim, but we will get to that in a few. As is standard, the Offer provided that the parties would enter into a standard form purchase and sale agreement by a specific deadline. However, the seller’s attorney did not sent out a draft PSA until after the deadline, and negotiations continued well past the deadline without any issue raised by the parties or their attorneys. Both attorneys had suggested formalizing an extension of the PSA deadline at various times, but a formal extension agreement was never signed. At some point the seller’s attorney tried to cease the negotiations acknowledging that “we are well beyond our [PSA] date.” A week later, the buyer’s attorney tried to resurrect negotiations and save the deal. Further negotiations ensued between the parties, but they were abruptly stopped by the seller’s attorney who stated that the deal was for all intents and purposes dead.

Mr. Ferguson, the buyer, was naturally upset, and sued, seeking an order of “specific performance” to enforce the deal, based on well established law that an offer to purchase is a legally binding contract for the sale of real estate. (Read the case if you want to learn about various procedural issues that arose in the case with respect to the buyer’s obtaining a lis pendens and the seller’s special motion to dismiss under the lis pendens law.).

Two Important Take-Aways

The important take-aways from the ruling were twofold. First, the Court ruled that the typical deadline to execute the purchase and sale agreement is not always a hard deadline. Some people may be surprised to here that, but under Massachusetts law, a deadline in any contract can be “waived” by the parties words, actions, or conduct. Here, the Court said that a waiver of the deadline could be found where the seller’s attorney didn’t provide the draft PSA until after the deadline and the parties freely negotiated well past the deadline, even without a formal extension in place. Second, the Court also held that where the property is owned by several individuals, only having one of those individuals sign the offer is not necessarily fatal to the deal. If there is evidence that the signatory had apparently authority to sign for the others, or that the sellers ratified the offer, then the contract could be enforced. So now the buyer’s case will continue on for trial. Interestingly, during the pendency of the case, the sellers sold the property to another party. If the buyer is successfully, that new buyer is going to be very unhappy because his transfer will be voided! He may want to lawyer up himself.

Let’s Play Monday Morning Quarterback!

Now, what could have been done differently in this case to avoid the bad result for the seller? For starters, the seller’s attorney should have delivered the draft PSA on time. Once the parties started negotiations after the PSA deadline, they were in “no man’s zone” and that can only come back to hurt the sellers. Deadlines need to be taken very seriously, and sharp lawyers will always send out emails or other written reminders of them, and reserve their rights to terminate an agreement if the parties blow past a deadline without a written extension in place. The buyer’s attorney played this correctly, and didn’t push on the deadline issue because the law would favor his client on the waiver issue (which it ultimately did).

{ 0 comments }

Massachusetts Purchase and Sale Agreement Tips: Modifications of Paragraph 10, Extensions Due To Title Issues

by Rich Vetstein on June 30, 2013

in Closings, Condominium Law, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Purchase and Sale Agreements, Realtors, Title Defects

Overview of “Standard” Changes to the GBREB Form Purchase and Sale Agreement

Missing mortgage discharges, problematic probates, “Ibanez” foreclosure issues and other title defects are always an unwelcome surprise to a seller, their Realtor and attorney. But they are unfortunately a common part of life in the real estate conveyancing world. The “standard” purchase and sale agreement form commonly used by Realtors and attorneys (Greater Boston Real Estate Board) provides for what happens in a transaction if a title defect is discovered and cannot be cleared quickly.

The GBREB form, paragraph 10, which is still in widespread use, provides as follows:

If the SELLER shall be unable to give title or to make conveyance, or to deliver possession of the premises, all as herein stipulated, or if at the time of the deed the premises do not conform with the provisions hereof, then any payments made under this agreement shall forthwith be refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease, and this agreement shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto, unless the SELLER elects to use reasonable efforts to remove any defects in title, or to deliver possession as provided herein, or to make the said premises conform to the provisions hereof, as the case may be, in which event the Seller shall given written notice thereof to the Buyer at or before the time for performance hereunder, and thereupon the time for performance hereof shall be extended for a period of thirty days.

The standard provision is, unfortunately, outdated and problematic. Accordingly, experienced Realtors and attorneys are taught to modify this provision from the outset as follows:

If the SELLER shall be unable to give title or to make conveyance, or to deliver possession of the premises, all as herein stipulated, or if at the time of the deed the premises do not conform with the provisions hereof, then any payments made under this agreement shall forthwith be refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease, and this agreement shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto, unless then the SELLER shall ~~elect to~~ use reasonable efforts to remove any defects in title, or to deliver possession as provided herein, or to make the said premises conform to the provisions hereof, as the case may be, in which event the Seller shall given written notice thereof to the Buyer at or before the time for performance hereunder, and thereupon the time for performance hereof shall be extended for a period of thirty days.

These standard modifications ensure that the Seller is initially responsible for clearing any title defects and gives them 30 days in which to do so. If the Seller cannot clear the title defect within 30 days, then both parties have the option of terminating the deal and all deposits must be returned.

Limiting Seller’s Financial Exposure

To limit the seller’s out of pocket expenses to clear title defects, real estate attorneys representing the seller will often insert language such as this at the end of paragraph 10:

Reasonable efforts shall be defined as the Seller’s expenditure of no more than $________, exclusive of all voluntary encumbrances which secure the payment of money which Seller shall be obligated to remove.

The dollar amount is typically anywhere between $1,000 – $4000 depending on the purchase price.

Protecting The Buyer

On the buyer side, what happens if during the 30 day extension cure period, the buyer’s rate lock expires and interest rates are floating up (like now)? Experienced buyer attorneys will often insert the following language in their riders:

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, if SELLER extends this Agreement to perfect title or make the Premises conform as provided in Paragraph 10, and if BUYER’S mortgage commitment or rate lock would expire prior to the expiration of said extension, then such extension shall continue, at BUYER’S option, only until the date of expiration of BUYER’S mortgage commitment or rate lock. BUYER may elect, at its sole option, to obtain an extension of its mortgage commitment or rate lock or the Seller may elect to pay for same.

This language will ensure that the buyer doesn’t wind up floating up the interest rate river with an untimely rate lock expiration. This situation has come up rather frequently over the last several months as interest rates have increased dramatically.

This is just one, albeit a very important, part of how an experienced real estate attorney works up the purchase and sale agreement. I will do some more posts on other aspects of the P&S Agreement. Stay tuned!

___________________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is a Massachusetts real estate closing attorney with offices in Framingham and Needham, MA. He can be reached at [email protected] or 508.620.5352.

{ 3 comments }

Buyer Loses $31,000 Deposit After Refusing To List Current Residence For Sale As Financing Condition

by Rich Vetstein on January 30, 2012

in Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Mortgages, Offer To Purchase, Purchase and Sale Agreements, Real Estate Litigation

Standard Mortgage Contingency Language At Issue

I recently came across a very interesting and scary case from the Appeals Court, Survillo v. McDonough No. 11–P–290. Dec. 2, 2011. (It’s technically an “unpublished” opinion but it’s available to the public). The case underscores how carefully attorneys must craft the mortgage contingency to protect the buyer’s deposit in case financing is approved with adverse conditions.

“Prevailing Rates, Terms and Conditions”

The buyers, Mr. and Mrs. Survillo, submitted the standard Offer To Purchase the sellers’ home in Walpole. The offer provided it was “Not subject to the Sale of any other home.” The sellers accepted the offer. The buyers received a conditional pre-approval from a local bank for a first mortgage in the amount of $492,000. The pre-approval also stated that anticipated loan was “[n]ot based on sale of any residence.”

The parties then entered into the standard form purchase and sale agreement (P & S), with the typical mortgage contingency provision for a $429,000 mortgage loan:

“In order to help finance the acquisition of said premises, the [buyers] shall apply for a conventional bank or other institutional mortgage loan of $492,000.00 at prevailing rates, terms and conditions. If despite the [buyers] diligent efforts a commitment for such loan cannot be obtained on or before October 5, 2009, the [buyers] may terminate this agreement by written notice to the [sellers] and/or the Broker(s), as agent(s) for the [sellers], prior to the expiration of such time, whereupon any payments made under this agreement shall be forthwith refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease and this agreement shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto “

Change In Circumstances: Lender Requires Piggyback Loan & Buyers List Their Residence

Due to the buyers’ debt to income ratios, the lender required that the loan be structured as a “piggyback” — a first mortgage of $417,000 and second mortgage of $73,400, and with the condition that the buyers listing their primary residence for sale prior to the loan closing. The buyers absolutely did not want to list and seller their residence, so they wanted out of the deal.

On the last day of the extended financing deadline, the buyers timely notified the sellers that they had “not received a loan commitment with acceptable conditions,” and attempted to back out of the agreement under the mortgage contingency provision. Ultimately, with the buyers refusing to sell their home, the bank denied the buyer’s the mortgage application based on the fact that the “borrower would be carrying three mortgage payments and the debt to income is too high.”

Focus On “Prevailing Terms” Language

The sellers refused to return the deposit, and litigation over the deposit ensued.

The Court framed the case as follows: “Before the extended mortgage contingency deadline of October 21, the buyers received a commitment from the bank for two mortgages totaling $492,000. The P & S’s mortgage contingency was accordingly satisfied unless the bank’s requirement that the buyers list their home for sale was not a “prevailing” term or condition.”

The court started with the assumption that “the typical loan condition for most borrowers is to require them to sell an existing home before the new loan closes. The condition here required only that the buyers list, not sell, their home and it was accordingly not a typical condition.” The buyers argued that because the condition was unusual, it was not a “prevailing” condition within the meaning of the contingency clause of the P & S, despite the fact that the condition was more favorable to them than the standard condition. The court flat out rejected that argument, citing prior rulings that terms of a mortgage contingency presuppose that the buyers will accept commercially reasonable loan terms. If less is required, the condition becomes an option. The court also noted that the buyers failed to notified the sellers that they were unwilling to list or sell their existing home, nor did they insert a proviso to that effect into the mortgage contingency clause. Subsequent events suggested that if the buyers had timely disclosed their intentions to the bank, the loan would have been disapproved, which may well have given the buyers the shelter they sought under the mortgage contingency clause.

The court ruled against the buyers who had to forfeit their $31,000 deposit.

An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth A Pound of Cure

I’m not sure who is to blame here, the buyer’s attorney or the buyers themselves. Probably both.

From a legal drafting approach and as the court pointed out, the buyer’s attorney could have insisted on language into the mortgage contingency provision that the buyers’ financing could not be conditioned on the listing or sale of the buyers’ present residence. After all, the language was in the Offer, so it could have easily been carried over into the P&S. There was no indication from the decision that this was raised or negotiated.

It also seems apparent that the buyers were not particularly up front with anyone on their insistence that they would not list and sell their current residence. If they had been more forthcoming about that, perhaps they could have avoided this situation.

A commenter on Boston.com also places some blame on the loan officer: “Not all pre-approvals are created equal. For a few minutes of work and adherance to a common standard of practice by the mortgage professional, a true pre-approval is supported by a credit report, the main criteria for ability to qualify for a mortgage. This is generated in a few seconds, and the pre-approval letter usually states subject to verification of income, assets, and property appraisal. Had this been done, THE DEBT TO INCOME RATIO ISSUE WOULD HAVE SURFACED EARLY.”

Based on the loan amount, this mistake or gamble cost the buyers around $31,000 plus legal fees. Ouch!

________________________________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts real estate attorney. Please contact him if you need assistance with a Massachusetts purchase or sale transaction.

{ 3 comments }

Massachusetts Purchase & Sale Agreement Contingencies In A Changed Market

by Rich Vetstein on March 25, 2011

in Appraisals, Closings, Condominium Law, Fannie Mae, FHA, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Mortgages, Purchase and Sale Agreements

The “Standard Form”

In Massachusetts, buyers and sellers typically use the standard form purchase and sale agreement created by the Greater Boston Board of Real Estate. This form has been around since the late 1970’s and last updated in 1999–which might as well be 100 years ago in real estate life. Along with the standard form, attorneys for sellers and buyers customarily add specialized Riders to the agreement which modify the standard form and add contingencies particular to the deal.

A Vastly Changed Landscape

The legal and mortgage financing landscape has changed so much in the last few years, with Fannie Mae and regulatory agencies issuing a new policy what seems like every other week, and short sale and REO transactions becoming much more prevalent. With the recovering market and new appraisal guidelines, some homes are not appraising out. Moreover, lenders have tightened underwriting requirements considerably. As a result, borrowers have more difficulty qualifying for mortgage loans, it takes longer to get a loan commitment, and there are often delays in getting the loan “cleared to close.” All these changes in the real estate landscape require re-thinking of the standard form purchase and sale agreement and the associated riders.

As experienced Massachusetts real estate attorneys, it shouldn’t come as a surprise to know that we are on top of the latest changes in the Massachusetts and national real estate landscape, and have adapted our legal forms accordingly. I’ll go through 3 recent changes that I’ve adopted in my practice.

Low Appraisal Contingency

These days, appraisals are administered is a completely different fashion. New rules – the Home Valuation Code of Conduct (HVCC) – hold appraisers to higher standards and sharply limit communication between appraisers and lenders. Mortgage professionals can no longer select their “hand-picked” appraiser now; there is basically a random lottery system to select the appraiser. The downside of this lottery is that the appraiser may not be very familiar with the town or neighborhood being appraised. So the appraisal may fall short of the agreed-upon selling price.

I always insist on this provision to protect a buyer against the risk of the property not appraising out.

Appraisal– The buyer’s obligations, hereunder, are contingent upon the BUYER’s lender obtaining an appraisal of the property in an amount at least equal to the purchase price of the premises.

What happens if the property doesn’t appraise for asking price? Sometimes you can ask for a second appraisal or bring different comparable sales to the appraiser’s attention and he can revise the appraisal. Sometimes, the parties must re-negotiate the purchase price. Talk to your lender and Realtor about the options. This provision, however, gives the buyer an “out” if a low appraisal cannot be overcome.

Condominium Fannie Mae Compliance

Tougher Fannie Mae and FHA condominium rules have made condo financing much more challenging. I add this clause to deal with this situation:

The Condominium, the Unit, and the Condominium Documents (including but not limited to the Master Deed and By-Laws/Trust) shall conform to the requirements of Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA” or “Freddie Mac”), Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”) or Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”) or other secondary mortgage market investor, and shall otherwise be acceptable to BUYER’s mortgage lender.

Rate Lock Expirations

Delays happen. There may be a title problem which the seller needs a few days or weeks to correct. But what if your rate lock will expire and you are facing a higher interest rate loan? This provision protects the buyer in this situation:

MODIFICATION TO PARAGRAPH 10: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, if SELLER extends this Agreement to perfect title or make the Premises conform as provided in Paragraph 10, and if BUYER’S mortgage commitment or rate lock would expire prior to the expiration of said extension, then such extension shall continue, at BUYER’S option, only until the date of expiration of BUYER’S mortgage commitment or rate lock.

There are many other contingencies and new provisions that I use, but I cannot give them all away!

___________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts Real Estate Attorney. For further information you can contact him at [email protected].

{ 0 comments }

Massachusetts Purchase And Sale Agreement Basics

by Rich Vetstein on May 11, 2010

in Condominium Law, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Offer To Purchase, Purchase and Sale Agreements

TRID Update: Please review our article on new changes with the PS Agreement

As a real estate attorney, I always take the time to fully explain to our clients the intricacies of the Massachusetts Purchase and Sale Agreement.

The purchase and sale agreement is the governing contract between the Buyer and the Seller regarding the proposed property to purchase. Most Buyers submit an initial Offer to Purchase to a Seller, which spells out the terms of the contract. The purchase and sale agreement supersedes the offer, and can be thought of as the “long form” contract. At first blush, the purchase and sale agreement, like most legal documents, can be difficult to read and comprehend.

Deal Terms

First, like all contracts, the purchase and sale agreement sets out the terms of the deal. These terms primarily are taken from the offer. This includes the names of the parties, the legal description of the property (taken from the current deed), the purchase price, the mortgage commitment date, the closing date, any Seller credits, and any agreed upon fixtures that will remain with the property or be taken by the Seller.

Title and Deed

Second, the purchase and sale agreement deals with the title to the property and the deed. It lays out the framework for a conveyance (a real estate transfer) in Massachusetts. The agreement spells out that the Seller conveys the deed to the Buyer in return for consideration, then the deed is recorded and the Buyer becomes the owner of the property. However, in Massachusetts, once the deed is recorded at the proper Registry of Deeds, then any title issues “run with the land.” Thus, the new owner becomes responsible for any outstanding encumbrances or liens that were not properly discharged. In order to protect the Buyer, the purchase and sale agreement provides that the Seller must convey “good, clear and marketable” title. Acting as the buyer’s or lender’s counsel, or both, attorneys will review the title exam and work with the Seller’s attorney to clear any title issues, so that the buyer will receive a certification of title and an owner’s title insurance policy.

Seller Responsibilities

Third, the purchase and sale agreement lays out the responsibilities of the Seller. This includes maintaining insurance and upkeep on the property until closing, obtaining a smoke and carbon monoxide certificate at closing, paying the broker’s commission, obtaining a 6(d) certificate for a condominium, and requiring that the taxes be paid by Seller up until the closing date (through an adjustment to the HUD Settlement Statement). The agreement also provides that the Seller’s agent (either the realtor or the attorney) holds the buyer’s deposit in an escrow account.

Anything But “Standard”

There is a note of caution about the standard form Massachusetts purchase and sale agreement. The standard form provides several hidden advantages to a Seller, I’ve written about on this Blog. Thus, buyers must have an experienced attorney revise the agreement and flag those built in deficiencies. For example, if a Buyer were to default prior to closing, the standard form document provides no cap on the damages; a skilled attorney will know to cap the damages at the deposit. The same is true if a buyer loses his rate lock if there is a delay of the closing; a skilled attorney would use language to protect the buyer in this situation.

An experienced attorney will produce a Rider to the purchase and sale agreement that will have language that protects a Buyer’s deposit and provides an aggressive layer of due diligence. For example, if the Buyer is purchasing a condominium, the Rider should have the Seller make representations that the association is not contemplating any special assessments, there are no pending lawsuits against the association, and the budget is in good order. Other issues include seller repairs, septic system/Title V compliance, radon gas, UFFI insulation, lead paint, and buyers’ access to the property while it is under agreement.

Since the P&S is “anything but standard,” an experienced real estate attorney who review and negotiates the document will certainly add value to the closing process.

{ 2 comments }

The Massachusetts Offer To Purchase Real Estate: A Binding Contract

by Rich Vetstein on September 8, 2009

in Condominium Law, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Offer To Purchase, Purchase and Sale Agreements, Tax Credit, TRID

Update (6/10/13): Battle of the Forms! Mass. Ass’n of Realtors vs. Greater Boston Bd. of Realtors Standard Form Offers

Update (10/3/15) New TRID Addendum

The Standard Massachusetts Offer To Purchase

The first step in purchasing or selling Massachusetts residential real estate is the presentation and acceptance of an Offer To Purchase. Most often, the buyers’ real estate broker prepares the offer to purchase on a pre-printed Greater Boston Real Estate Board standard form and presents it to the seller for review, modification, and acceptance. Attorneys are often not involved in the offer stage. However, in light of the legal significance of a signed offer and recent litigation over offers, buyers (and their brokers) and sellers may be wise to consult an attorney to review the offer.

An Accepted & Signed Offer Is A Binding Contract

Many sellers (and their brokers) are under the misconception that the offer to purchase is merely a formality, and that a binding contract is formed only when the parties sign the more extensive purchase and sale agreement. This is not true. Under established Massachusetts case law, a signed standard form offer to purchase is a binding and enforceable contract to sell real estate even if the offer is subject to the signing of a more comprehensive purchase and sale agreement. So if a seller signs and accepts an offer and later gets a better deal, I wouldn’t advise the seller to attempt to walk away from the original deal. Armed with a signed offer, buyers can sue for specific performance, and record a “lis pendens,” or notice of claim, in the registry of deeds against the property which will effectively prevent its sale until the litigation is resolved. I’ve handled many of these types of cases, and buyers definitely have the upper hand given the current state of the law.

There have also been recent court rulings holding that both email and text may constitute an enforceable contract even where no formal offer has been signed by both parties.

In some cases, the seller may not desire to be contractually bound by the acceptance of an offer to purchase while their property is taken off the market. In that case, safe harbor language can be drafted to specify the limited nature of the obligations created by the accepted offer. This is rather unusual, however, in residential transactions.

Home Inspection & Mortgage Contingencies

With the offer to purchase, I always advise buyers and their brokers to use a standard form addendum to address such contingencies as mortgage financing, home inspection, radon, lead paint, and pests. The home inspection and related tests are typically completed before the purchase and sale agreement is signed and any inspection issues are dealt with in the purchase and sale agreement. If they are not, there is an inspection contingency added to the P&S. See my post on purchase and sales agreements for that discussion.

The mortgage contingency is likewise critical. With mortgage loans harder to underwrite and approve, we are seeing loan commitment deadlines extended out for at least 30-45 days from the signing of the purchase and sale agreement. Always consult your mortgage lender before making an offer to see how much time they will need to process and approval your loan. The loan commitment deadline is one, if not the most, important deadlines in the contract documents.

In order to help finance the acquisition of said premises, the BUYER shall apply for a conventional bank or other institutional mortgage loan of $[proposed loan amount] at prevailing rates, terms and conditions. If despite the BUYER’S diligent efforts, a commitment for such a loan cannot be obtained on or before [30-45 days from signing of purchase-sale agreement], the BUYER may terminate this agreement by written notice to the SELLER in accordance with the term of the rider, prior to the expiration of such time, whereupon any payments made under this agreement shall be forthwith refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease and this agreements shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto. In no event will the BUYER be deemed to have used diligent efforts to obtain such commitment unless the BUYER submits a complete mortgage loan application conforming to the foregoing provisions on or before [2-5 business days from signing of purchase and sale agreement].

Any time the parties agree to an extension of any deadline in the offer (and the purchase and sale agreement for that matter) make sure it’s in writing.

_______________________________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts real estate closing and conveyancing attorney and former outside counsel to a national title insurance company. Please contact him if you need legal assistance with your Massachusetts real estate transaction.

{ 26 comments }

There’s Nothing “Standard” About The Massachusetts Standard Form Real Estate Purchase And Sale Agreement

by Rich Vetstein on August 21, 2009

in Condominium Law, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Purchase and Sale Agreements, Realtors, Tax Credit, Title Defects, Title Insurance

The Massachusetts Purchase and Sale Agreement Is Anything But “Standard”

Home buyers sign a never ending pile of legal documents to purchase a home. But arguably the most important document in the entire transaction is the Massachusetts purchase and sale agreement. The purchase and sale agreement is signed after the Offer to Purchase is executed, and spells out the parties’ responsibilities during the interim period when the property is taken off the market and the closing.

Important Update: Please read our article on the new TRID Rules

In Massachusetts, the form most often used is the so-called standard form agreement supplied by the Greater Boston Real Estate Board or one modeled very closely to this form. (Due to copyright laws, we cannot embed the standard form agreement — contact my office if you need assistance with drafting a purchase and sale agreement). The “standard” form purchase and sale agreement is, however, far from standard, especially for buyers. In fact, the standard form is very much slanted in favor of the seller, and the playing field must be “leveled” to protect the buyer’s interests.

Click here to read our series of posts on the Massachusetts Purchase and Sale Agreement

This is why it’s imperative that home buyers and sellers alike retain a Massachusetts real estate attorney to modify the “standard” form purchase and sale agreement in order to best protect all parties’ rights and remedies, and customize the agreement to the particular aspects of the transaction. This is typically done through a “rider” to the purchase and sales agreement. Often, the buyers’ attorney and the sellers’ attorney will attached two different riders to the agreement.

I’ll outline a few common issues not addressed adequately in the “standard” purchase and sale agreement. (Most of these are from the buyer’s perspective).

Mortgage Contingency

The “standard” purchase and sale agreement does provide a basic mortgage contingency which gives the buyer the option of terminating the agreement if mortgage financing falls through. However, for a buyer, the more specific you are in terms of interest rate, points, name of lending institution and definition of “diligent efforts,” the better. Buyers’ counsel should specify that the buyer will not be required to apply to more than one institutional lender currently making mortgage loans of the type sought by the buyer and that the buyer may terminate the purchase and sale agreement unless the buyer obtains a firm, written commitment for a mortgage loan. Here is a sample rider provision:

MODIFICATION TO PARAGRAPH 26: Application to one such bank or mortgage lender by such date shall constitute “diligent efforts.” If the written loan commitment contains terms and conditions that are beyond BUYER’S reasonable ability to control or achieve, or if the commitment requires BUYER to encumber property other than the subject property, BUYER may terminate this agreement, whereupon any payments made under this agreement shall be forthwith refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease and this agreement shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto.

Home Inspection/Repairs

Typically, buyers complete the home inspection process prior to the signing of the purchase and sale agreement, and any inspection contingency provision is deleted from the purchase and sale agreement. What happens if the inspection results are not ready before the P&S signing deadline or if the seller has agreed to perform repairs prior to the closing or give a credit at closing? In this case, a home inspection contingency clause should be added back to the agreement, and any seller repairs or closing credits should be meticulously detailed in the rider.

Septic Systems/Title V

If the home is serviced by an on-site sewage disposal system otherwise known as a septic system, the Massachusetts Septic System Regulations known as Title V requires the inspection of the system within 2 years of the sale of the home. Failed septic systems can cost many thousands of dollars to repair or replace. Thus, buyers would look to be released from the agreement if the septic system fails inspection. Alternatively, buyers could be given the option to close if the seller can repair the septic system during an agreed upon time period, provided that the buyers do not lose their mortgage rate lock.

Radon Gas

Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas. The ground produces the gas through the normal decay of uranium and radium. As it decays, radon produces new radioactive elements called radon daughters or decay products which scientists have proven to cause lung cancer. Radon testing should be performed by buyers during the home inspection process. Elevated levels of radon (above 4.0 picoCuries per liter (pCi/l) can be treated through radon remediation systems. The purchase and sale agreement should provide for a radon testing contingency and the buyers’ ability to terminate the agreement if elevated radon levels are found, or the option of having the sellers pay for a radon remediation system.

Lead Paint

Under the Massachusetts Lead Paint Law, buyers of property are entitled to have the property inspected for the presence of lead paint. (Sellers are not required to remove lead paint in a sale situation). Because the abatement of lead paint can be costly, buyers typically look for a right to terminate the purchase and sale agreement if lead paint exists and the abatement/removal of it exceeds a certain dollar threshold. Here is an example of a provision added to the standard form:

LEAD PAINT. Seller acknowledges that the Buyers have a child under six (6) years of age who will live in the premises. In accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 111, section 197A, as the premises was constructed prior to 1978, Buyer may have the premises inspected for the presence of lead paint which inspection shall be completed within ten (10) days after the execution of this Agreement, unless extended in writing by the parties. If the inspection reveals the presence of lead paint, the abatement and/or removal of which will cost $2,000 or more, then Buyer may terminate this agreement, whereupon any payments made under this agreement shall be forthwith refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease and this agreement shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto. Any lead paint removal or abatement shall be Buyers’ responsibility.

Access

When my wife and I signed the Offer to Purchase on our house, she couldn’t wait to get in there with her tape measure, paint chips and fabric swatches. Oftentimes overlooked, but a cause of friction is buyers’ ability to access the house prior to the closing. To avoid such friction, an access clause should be added to the purchase and sale agreement giving the buyer reasonable access at reasonable time with advance notice to the sellers–it’s still their house after all.

These are just a few of the issues not adequately addressed by the “standard” form purchase and sale agreement. There are many more.

_________________________________________
Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is a nationally recognized real estate attorney, and has handled thousands of Massachusetts real estate transactions. He can be reached via email at [email protected].

{ 31 comments }

Purchase and Sale Agreements

Contract Deadlines Can Be Waived and Other Cautionary Tales From the Real Estate Trenches

Massachusetts Purchase and Sale Agreement Tips: Modifications of Paragraph 10, Extensions Due To Title Issues

Buyer Loses $31,000 Deposit After Refusing To List Current Residence For Sale As Financing Condition