Century 21 Award - Larry Nelson/Shannon Bender

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12256412, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.Once the $has been received, I will consider the case closedThank you*** ***

*** *** and *** *** Real Estate Agent and Broker respectively for Sellers - *** *** took walk-through of property we were interested in on June He submitted this information to us on November He nor the Sellers revealed that they had built numerous structures guest house pool shop on their land which were illegal non permitted The Preliminary Title Report revealed that these people Sellers had over worth of citations against them We did not receive the Report in a timely manner It took them approximately three weeks for them to produce it By this time we had already made numerous trips from Los Angeles and paid an inspector for an Inspection Report Also and the biggest part of this is that we lost our rate lock on our loan messing around with these people for nothing for so long - resulting in more over the year loan very disappointing and their fault Had we had this information timely we would certainly not have sp

Yes but I want *** to give me in writing that this will resolve her complaint

July 25, 2017 [redacted] Revdex.com 2600 W. Shaw Lane Fresno, CA 93711 Re: Complain ID #12256412 Dear Ms. [redacted], In response to the complaint received by my office on July 19, 2017 below is my response. Let me start off by clarifying that I, [redacted], was not...

a party to this transaction, I am the branch manager of the Century 21 Award Temecula branch office and supervise 43 agents, of which, [redacted] is one of them. In going through the file here is what I have found: Buyer was represented by her own buyer's agent. We received an offer for purchase written on November 3, 2016. It was countered by the seller and then agreed to on November 6th. Prior to this date the property had been in escrow with a different buyer. In accordance with the purchase agreement, the seller and buyers had the following important dates to adhere to: 1. Seller delivery of disclosures by November 13, 2016. 2. Buyer Investigation of property and review of disclosures by November 23, 2016. 3. Buyer's appraisal to be completed by November 23, 2016 4. Buyer's loan to be approved by November 27, 2016. These dates are what each party to the transaction tries to abide by in order to stay in compliance with the purchase contract agreed to by the buyer and seller. The inspection period (first 17 days) is for the buyer to do their due diligence. Oftentimes, there are costs associated with that research into the property and that is the buyer's responsibility in any real estate transaction. Those costs are incurred for the buyer's benefit. The title report, once delivered, uncovered the non-permit issues and citations. The listing agent was unaware of unpermitted items on the property as it is outside the agent's scope of responsibility to search public records. Upon receipt of the title report the citations were discovered surrounding the permit issues and the listing agent advised the seller to make full disclosure. The listing agent also spoke with the buyer's agent about the findings and the delay in further disclosures while the seller investigated the violations. The seller immediately wrote an addendum informing the buyers of the non-permitted items on the property and pending citations. The buyer signed it the same day. We are not aware of a home inspection being completed by a professional inspector as a copy was not delivered to the listing agent (as required by the contract) and an appointment was not made through the listing agent. We are only aware that the buyer showed up unexpectedly one day and inspected the property, according to the seller. No appraisal was ever scheduled or completed so therefore no out of pocket costs for any appraisal was incurred and the file ultimately cancelled on November 22, 2016. A full refund of the buyers deposit was released back to the buyer. According to the agreed upon purchase contract all investigations of all matters affecting the property, outside of what is disclosed already by the seller, is the buyer's responsibility and at their own cost. Hence, it seems the agent, [redacted], did his due diligence and did perform correctly. Sellers and agents are not party to the negotiations and choosing of the buyers lender. The total escrow period was for 30 days, the loan lock is not the agent's or seller's responsibility and should not have become an issue within the 16 days that the buyer and seller were in escrow. Hence, there was no charge to the buyer for any amount on a loan that was not completed and if so, it was not the agent's responsibility. Neither the listing agent, nor the Manager will be refunding any amount of the parties disputed $2800 requested as the agent involved did perform their duties per the contract signed between buyer and seller. Respectfully, [redacted] Branch Manager / Broker Associate CalBRE#01399249 ###-###-####