Sign in

Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc.

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc.? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc.

Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc. Reviews (1)

Review: I am a Chief Warrant Officer on active duty with the US Coast Guard. I am writing to seek your assistance with a local real estate broker and local real estate agent.

In May of 2013, my wife and I were put in touch with [redacted], a real estate with Cali-Link Realty & Mortgage. We were first-time homeowners and were concerned about the value of our home in Elk Grove.

I knew it was possible that I might receive transfer orders effective in the summer of 2014. I also knew that a special federal law provides protections to members of the armed forces in the event they have to sell their homes in a short sale because of a transfer. My wife and I wanted to get a sense of our home's value so we could so some advance financial planning.

We made clear to Ms. [redacted] from our first contact with her that we had no interest in moving from our home until I was transferred outside the [redacted], which would occur no sooner than summer 2014. In sum, we had no interest in moving for at least a year.

Rather than simply providing us with information about current home values in our area and staying in touch with us over the coming year, Ms. [redacted] was very persistent in pressuring us to immediately put the house on the market and to condition the sale on the buyer allowing us to lease back the home until I was transferred. After several meetings, we agreed to list the house for sale although we remained concerned about the advisability of doing so.

Ms. [redacted] presented us with a standard form listing agreement made out for a one-year listing term. A copy is enclosed. At no time did she tell us that the listing term could be for a much shorter time, such as for 90 days.

We have subsequently learned from a lawyer, as our real estate agent, Ms. [redacted] had fiduciary duties to us, which required her to put our interests before hers. Although she was our fiduciary, she never told us the listing agreement could be for a shorter term than one full year. We also now realize that in pressuring us to sign a listing agreement more than a year before we might have to move, Ms. [redacted] failed to put our interests ahead of hers.

Although we worked with and cooperated with Ms. [redacted] during the summer of 2013, she was unable to find a buyer willing to buy our house and to lease it back for a year or more. During that time, we became unhappy with the quality of her services. (Our complaints are described in a letter from our lawyer to Ms. [redacted] dated November 21, 2013. A copy of the letter is enclosed.)

In late summer 2013, we asked Ms. [redacted] to terminate the listing agreement. We had lost all faith in Ms. [redacted] and did not want to work her with anymore. We concluded that she did not have our best interests at heart and could not be trusted. Ms. [redacted] refused to cancel the listing agreement. She finally agreed to take the house off the market until March 2014.

My wife and I remained very troubled at the prospect of having to deal further with Ms. [redacted]. Through the Coast Guard Legal Services Office in [redacted], we were put in touch with a lawyer who has assisted us on a pro bono basis.

He had twice written [redacted], the broker for whom Ms. [redacted] works at Cali-Link, requesting that the listing agreement be terminated on a pure walk-away, no-fault basis. Copies of the letters and proposed termination agreement are enclosed. Ms. ** never has responded to our lawyer's letters. Ms. [redacted] has responded to the letters and refuses to release us from the listing agreement unless we either pay her 3 percent of the value of our house or let the listing agreement run for its full one-year term. She takes this position even though she had a chance to sell our home and never produced a buyer actually willing to buy the house on our terms. Copies of her responses are enclosed, along with contact and license information for Cali-Link and Ms. [redacted].

At this point, I am no certain whether I will be transferred in the summer of 2014 and if so, whether any transfer will be out of the [redacted]. I do know that neither my wife nor I want to do any further business with Ms. [redacted] if we have to sell our house.

We believe she put her interests before ours in pressuring us to sign a listing agreement more than a year before we might have to move. She again put her interests before ours in failing to tell us that the term of the listing agreement could be much less than one year.

My wife and I hope that the Revdex.com can show Ms. [redacted] that it makes no sense for her to try to make clients do business with her. Our lawyer has prepared a simple no-fault termination of the listing agreement (copy enclosed), which Ms. [redacted] refuses to sign. If Revdex.com cannot help us with Ms. [redacted], we will have to take other steps because we want nothing more to do with her if we have to sell our house.Desired Settlement: Terminate the listing agreement.

Business

Response:

Over many years, common and statutory laws have evolved as regards to agency and fiduciary responsibilities. Our office maintains its excellence in knowing the law of our state that pertain to when you are an "agent" representing your client's needs. Ms. [redacted], who has been a licensed real estate agent for my organization for over years, has always upheld her fiduciary duties of obedience, loyalty, disclosure, confidentiality, accounting, and reasonable care.

Our office is in unequivocal disagreement with the complaint filed by [redacted] to your organization. Our response to this case has been well documented (see attached document), sent to the law offices of Mr. [redacted]. [redacted] who represents Mr. [redacted].

Ms. [redacted] entered into a legally signed listing agreement with the [redacted]'s and exercised due diligence in listing, marketing, showing, negotiating several offers, and giving relevant advice regarding the property. It is our position that that the [redacted]'s frustrated Ms. [redacted]'s efforts at selling the property because they did not want to pay a sales commission. Our office received three qualified offers in excess of the listing price of $399,000. Therefore, the issue with the [redacted]'s will remain in dispute and we will follow our legal recourse.

Consumer

Response:

Thank you for providing me with the response from Cali-Link Realty & Mortgage.

Cali-Link's claim that it brought forward three qualified offers is incorrect. Cali-Link never brought forward any ready, willing, and able buyers.

Based on information I provided, my lawyer responded on November 21, 2013, to the same incorrect claim by Cali-Link. A copy of my lawyer's letter was included in the package of material I sent the Revdex.com with my complaint. This issue is addressed in Point 1 of the November 21 letter.

In summary, three families who looked at our house expressed some interest in it, but no sales agreement could be reached with any of them:

- The [redacted] were unwilling to lease the house back to my wife and I for a year or more, in fact they only wanted to rent it back until Aug of 2013 - even though such a lease-back was central to [redacted]'s plan for selling my house a year or more before my family and I would need to move. Additionally, she wanted us to accept this offer and move out and rent a place until I received and executed orders, which was absolutely contrary to what we explained to her about our desire to moving unnecessarily.

- The [redacted] offer was conditional on a 2 percent rebate of the sales price from us to the [redacted]s. The [redacted]s also refused to waive the appraisal contingency. The [redacted]s real estate agent would not even return Ms. [redacted]'s phone calls. Ms. [redacted]'s went so far as to try to pressure my wife to speak with a neighbor who was a relative of the [redacted]s.

- The [redacted] would not come to terms with me even though I met personally with their son to try to work out an agreement. Instead, each time we neared agreement, they raised new issues. No agreement was ever reached.

Ms. [redacted] produced no buyers, only lookers and hagglers.

As you will see, not only is Cali-Link intentionally prolonging this issue by not responding to any request until the last minute or just past deadlines, they makes only generalized claims that they satisfied their fiduciary duties to my wife and I but makes no attempt to justify pressuring us to put our house up for sale a year early or failing to disclose that the listing agreement term could be much shorter than a year.

Contrary to Cali-Link's claim, my wife and I expect to pay a commission to the competent real estate agent or agents who sell our home when we are ready to move. But, we do not want to have any further dealings with Cali-Link or Ms. [redacted] because we do not trust them and do not believe they have done a good job or have represented our interests.

If you need any further information, please contact me using the information above.

Sincerely,

Consumer

Response:

This is to inform you and the Revdex.com that my wife, [redacted], and I have resolved our dispute with Cali-Link Realty and Mortgage Inc. regarding our home at [redacted] Way in [redacted] California.

We have entered into a Settlement Agreement with Cali-Link resolving our dispute.

Check fields!

Write a review of Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc.

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc. Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: Real Estate

Address: 6853 65th St, Sacramento, California, United States, 95828-1200

Phone:

Show more...

Add contact information for Cali-Link Realty Mortgage, Inc.

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated