The offer came in at full price but after closing costs and taxes, I end up with only 220.00. I rejected the full price offer and explained that I need to counter at 850k or stipulate that the buyer pays all commissions and closing costs. Now the realtor wants to sue....but she failed to consider the end result that was needed.
I spoke with her broker....real dickhead, so that's a dead end. Any hope available?
What you describe is a classic ambiguity: you remember "net" and the broker remembers "gross".
I suggest that you mediate this matter or litigation will devour the entire difference on a sales price of this amount.
Mediation seeks a "win-win" instead of litigation which is inherently "win-lose".
The above is general legal and business analysis. It is not "legal advice" but analysis, and different lawyers may analyse this matter differently, especially if there are additional facts not reflected in the question. I am not your attorney until retained by a written retainer agreement signed by both of us. I am only licensed in California. See also avvo.com terms and conditions item 9, incorporated as if it was reprinted here.
You should try to work things out with the realtor before he files suit.
I'm a real estate broker as well as an attorney.
Respectfully, your listing agreement is not based on net. The listing agreement specifies a gross sales price. Your net will vary according to when the property is sold, liens against the property at closing, and your conduct between execution of the listing agreement and sale. Your net of $250K-$275K is, by definition, ambiguous and will not support your demand.
IMO, you are responsible for the numbers, not your agent. If you lose the sale, you may be responsible for the full commission due the agent. You may also be faced with a specific performance lawsuit from the buyer. I agree you should promptly mediate the issue if you cannot immediately resolve it between yourselves.
My answers are for general information only. They are not legal advice. Answers assume California law. I am licensed in California, only. Answers must not be relied upon.<br> <br> Legal advice and counsel must be based on the interplay between specific exact facts and the law. This forum does not allow for the discussion of that interplay. My answer to any specific question would likely be different if that interplay were explored during an attorney-client relationship. <br> <br> I provide legal advice and counsel during the course of an attorney-client relationship only. The exchange of information through this forum does not establish such a relationship. That relationship is established only by personal and direct consultation with me followed by the execution of a written attorney-client agreement signed by each of us.<br> <br> The communications on this website are not privileged or confidential. I assume no duty to anyone by my participation on Avvo because I have answered or commented on a question. Specifically, I assume no duty to respond to any question, comment, telephone call, or email.<br> <br> All legal proceedings involve deadlines and time limiting statutes. So that legal rights are not lost for failure to timely take appropriate action and because I do not provide legal advice or counsel in answer to any question, if you are an interested party you should promptly and personally consult an attorney licensed in the appropriate jurisdiction for advice and counsel. See, also, Avvo's terms and conditions of use, specifically item 9, incorporated by this reference.<br>