Washington Fine Properties

From: ***@***.comTo: ***@myRevdex.com.orgCC: ***@wfp.com; ***.***@wpf.com; ***@***.net; ***@***.netSubject: *** Complaint #***Date: Tue, Mar 15:32:+0000*** * *** *** **.Marathon, FL ***
March 22, 2016*** ***The Better Business BureaK StNW, Flr 10Washington, DC 20005-3404Re: *** Complaint #***The Complainant, (*** ***) asserts that she incurred a $Home inspection Fee, which she was forced to purchase in order to uncover or misleading information contained in the real estate listing of *** *** **., NW Washington, DC *** I am the Seller of the Property.A review of the attached email evidence shows that her Revdex.com complain is actually and misleading and that it fails a basic common sense review Here are the facts:In an email, (Copied into ** *** and attached) sent to my agent, (*** ***) and forwarded to me on February 21, 2016, *** asks for "Clarity" from the Seller relating to the roof and HVAC *** had already signed a purchase contract on the property This is the first telling facet about *** ***. NOTE: The time to ask questions and get clarity is before one signs a contract not afterword.Non-the-less she emails my agent who copies me I respond on February 23, (Copied into ** *** and attached) In my response I indicate: 1.) That I cannot and will not enter into direct negotiations with a Buyer because the property is being offered and sold as: "As is" I went on to say: "I can't be any clearer" because she was asking for "Clarity".2.) That a Seller cannot give assurances to a Buyer because a Seller's and a Buyer's interests are dissimilar and the Seller has a bias and therefore cannot be considered objective.3.) I went on to advise her that if she had concerns about the property she should hire an unbiassed professional (A home inspection is common part of home purchases and is always (emphases added) at purchasers expense It has to be in order for it to be unbiased and in my experience $is a inexpensive price.)4.) I went on to tell her that if she had concerns with my property, she should find something else in the marketplace with which she was pleased and comfortable 5.) I continued in a subsequent paragraph to suggest that given the after-the-fact confusion we did not have a binding contract (I wondered how this need for clarity could exist and at the same time the parties have a meeting of the minds.) So I instructed my Agent, *** ***, to send a signed contract release to Ms*** so she could exit the contract cleanly What did *** did is telling! See Note below:NOTE: This is the geniuses of a Home Inspection I was NOT carried out "to uncover and misleading statements" as her Revdex.com Complaint asserts The evidence shows that it was carried out to "assuage concerns" and provide peace-of-mind to a homebuyer The timing allows for no other conclusion NOTE 2:What did *** do? She did NOT counter sign the release! In fact her Agent replied to *** *** insisting that we had a binding contract! Notice there was no mention of mis representations, advertising, etc *** responded with claims of a binding contract This was February 27th! Notice also that at that time no home inspection had occurred! Now ask yourself: What is the point of a home inspection if a buyer insists that they have a binding purchase contract? It makes no sense, an inspection is moot now! So one has to ask "What is *** trying to accomplish?"To my eye, *** got her dealings, (among other things) out of order She should have had a Home Inspection before she signed a contract If she finds misrepresentations advertising, etcafter-the-fact, she should be seeking to be released from her contract Yet she is NOT! She is simply negotiating In fact sadly it is worse Some time ago he threatened to besmirch *** *** at the Revdex.com if *** *** did not pay her $ This looks like extortion to me This whole episode seems to say more about ** ***'s character than anything about a real estate transaction Please read on.More Common sense: Practically speaking; it is nearly impossible to mis-represent an "As is" real estate listing If one did, the claim by a prospective buyer's could only be compensation for time wasted investigating the mis-represented property *** is NOT making such a claim Rather she has repeatedly insisted on buying the property! This fact pattern directly undermines her complaint So too does the order of events, the need for unbiased objectivity in the home Inspection and most of all *** ***'s actions.Conclusion: The evidence suggests that ** ***'s Complaint is: insincere, self serving and probably dis-honestIt is a contradiction and money grab!Thank you for your time and attention.Sincerely,Thomas JC*** ***Seller*** *** *** **Washington, DC ***