[WSBARP] Form 17 issue

Wed Nov 9 11:25:12 PST 2016

I have couple of thoughts to throw into the mix. RCW 64.06.030, says "upon receipt of a real property disclosure statement", the buyer has the option of accepting the statement or rescinding. It does not say a completed statement or any other qualifying language. Also, the MLS form differs from the statutory form. The statutory form simply provides for the buyers signature. The MLS form had three signature options. the first being just a signature line, the second accepts the statement and waives rescission, and the third provides for rescission. It suggests to me that the creator of the form saw this issue and was attempting to deal with it. 
      I think it is likely that the issue will not come before an appellate court for some time since so many purchase agreements limit the seller's remedy to the earnest money, and the earnest money that people seem to be getting now is so low, it is not worth litigating.
      Thanks all for the input.

Steve

Stephen Whitehouse
Whitehouse & Nichols, LLP
P.O. Box 1273
601 W. Railroad Ave.
Shelton, Wa. 98584
swhite8893 at aol.com

-----Original Message-----
From: wsbarp-request <wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
To: wsbarp <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 8, 2016 12:00 pm
Subject: WSBARP Digest, Vol 26, Issue 7

Send WSBARP mailing list submissions to
wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
wsbarp-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of WSBARP digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Re: Surveyor Referral (Gregory L. Ursich)
2. Re: Form 17 issue (Gregory L. Ursich)
3. Bankruptcy & Post-Petition Lease (Paul)
4. Test Email (Ms. Roberta Armstrong)
5. Re: Form 17 issue (John M. Riley III)
6. RE broker experienced with Palouse farmland (Mark Geyer)
7. Re: Form 17 issue (Craig Blackmon)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 12:08:53 -0800
From: "Gregory L. Ursich" <gursich at insleebest.com>
To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Surveyor Referral
Message-ID:
<7F8A366B7F232F429D049910E0F8A7510217D17F78DE at Exch1.insleebest.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Daniel Roupe of Group 4, Inc. 425-408-1152

[cid:image001.jpg at 01D238EF.B4D2D1A0]

Gregory L. Ursich | Shareholder
Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
vCard<http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website<http://www.insleebest.com/> | gursich at insleebest.com<mailto:gursich at insleebest.com>

This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Ross Gardner
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 8:56 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] Surveyor Referral

Good Morning All,

I am looking for a referral for a real estate surveyor to assist with a residential boundary line adjustment on the Eastside.

Thank you in advance!

Best Regards,

Ross Gardner
425-870-4430
RossGardner.JD at gmail.com<mailto:RossGardner.JD at gmail.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/e2f7d937/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2843 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/e2f7d937/image001-0001.jpg>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 12:43:00 -0800
From: "Gregory L. Ursich" <gursich at insleebest.com>
To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue
Message-ID:
<7F8A366B7F232F429D049910E0F8A7510217D17F78E0 at Exch1.insleebest.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I agree with Annie?s interpretation. If Form 17 is incomplete, then 3 days does not start to run.

[cid:image001.jpg at 01D238F4.79420070]

Gregory L. Ursich | Shareholder
Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
vCard<http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website<http://www.insleebest.com/> | gursich at insleebest.com<mailto:gursich at insleebest.com>

This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of atfitz at comcast.net
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 10:53 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

There has been significant discussion over this question among RE brokerage industry lawyers and not surprisingly, there is no single consensus answer. We would love for you to be a test case at the appellate level so we can have an answer!

I am of the opinion that because the questions seller must answer are statutorily mandated, seller MUST comply with seller's statutory obligations before the burden shifts to buyer to review and terminate or waive within three days of receipt. Until seller fully complies, buyer's termination period does not begin. It is not up to buyer to let seller know that seller did not comply with seller's statutory obligations.

The voices on the other side of the equation advocate the notion that courts will take a more reasonable approach and apply a common sense analysis over a black letter interpretation ... substance over form. Buyer had the opportunity to let seller know of a perceived failure in answering the questions and secreting that information away until a time that buyer wants to terminate the agreement is not "good faith" and would be frowned upon by a court.

I don't believe that you will find a lock solid answer to this question unless your client litigates and gets the answer for all of us.

________________________________
From: "Craig Blackmon" <craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com<mailto:craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com>>
To: "WSBA Real Property Listserv" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 10:34:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

I dunno. At a minimum, you can argue that the signed and dated acknowledgement constituted receipt of the "completed" form. If buyers thought the form was incomplete, they shouldn't have acknowledged receipt of it. But they did, and the three days ran. The more your facts are consistent with "buyer's remorse" and not anything to do with the actual Form 17, the stronger your argument.

That's what I'd argue if I were you. And I don't see any common law basis for rescission.

Craig

Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law
Seattle Real Estate Lawyer<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/>
92 Lenora St. (The Makers Space, a shared work environment)
Seattle WA 98121
Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949 Fax: (206) 770-7328
@LawyerBroker<https://twitter.com/LawyerBroker>
How to Buy Without an Agent<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Buy+without+an+Agent> | How to Sell FSBO<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Sell+FSBO> | RE Glossary<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Real+Estate+Glossary>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged nature. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all copies.

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Douglas W. Scott <doug at davisscottlaw.com<mailto:doug at davisscottlaw.com>> wrote:
I guess the questions are: did the buyer rescind based upon something generated from the unanswered questions? Why didn?t the seller eventually complete those 2 answers? Did the buyer ever ask that the seller complete them?

Douglas W. Scott
Law Offices of Douglas W. Scott
Windermere Building
1810 15th Place NW, Suite 203
Issaquah, Washington, 98027
V. 425.392.8550<tel:425.392.8550>
F. 425-392-2829<tel:425-392-2829>
www.davisscottlaw.com<http://www.davisscottlaw.com/>

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>] On Behalf Of Stephen Whitehouse
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 12:14 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

Listmates,
I am looking for feedback on your experience with a Form 17 issue.
The form was fully filled out except two answers were left blank. No issue was ever raised and now, four days before closing, buyer is rescinding on that basis.
RCW 64.06.030 requires a "completed" statement. However, it also states that the buyer has two options to exercise within three days, to rescind or to approve and accept the statement. In this case the buyer approved and accepted.
Has the buyer waived the defect, either statutorily, or under the common law? I understand there is some conventional wisdom emanating from the MLS that the buyer can rescind, but I think they tend to take conservative positions.
Any thoughts?
Thanks.

Steve

Stephen Whitehouse
Whitehouse & Nichols, LLP
P.O. Box 1273
601 W. Railroad Ave.
Shelton, Wa. 98584
swhite8893 at aol.com<mailto:swhite8893 at aol.com>

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/a77dccc6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2843 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/a77dccc6/image001-0001.jpg>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 21:02:57 +0000
From: Paul <pneumiller at hotmail.com>
To: "wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] Bankruptcy & Post-Petition Lease
Message-ID:
<BY1PR0401MB1255D8853CB5D420F1A9C530D2A70 at BY1PR0401MB1255.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Person files for Chapter 11 in May 2015 and then converts to a Chapter 7 Asset Case in March of 2016. In the meantime, the person leases a commercial space from my client in November 2015 (which is post-petition). The Person/Tenant is now in default of the lease for many months. Not knowing about the bankruptcy, I had the Person/Tenant served (but not filed yet) with a summons and complaint and the Person/Tenant just hand-delivered to me a letter saying he's moving out and that he's in bankruptcy. Ok, so normally, if Tenant doesn't move out as promised, I'd bring a motion for order to show cause hearing (because I can't take a default because the Tenant "answered").

So, Bankruptcy Gurus, (1) what is the impact of trying to enforce (or evict under) a post-petition lease? Am I able to file the UD Complaint and proceed as normal or what? (2) Knowing there is a bankruptcy filing, is there any kind of filing (Proof of Claim??) my client can make in the bankruptcy case (is this an administrative expense?) in order to get paid rent for the post-petition lease (3) If this is a post-petition lease/debt and Tenant delivers possession of the premises to the landlord, is it a violation of the bankruptcy stay to bring a collection action in civil court for the past rent.

[cid:image001.jpg at 01D238F5.3D742310]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/6fca0f35/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 16924 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/6fca0f35/image001-0001.jpg>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 13:51:38 -0800
From: "Ms. Roberta Armstrong" <robertaa at uw.edu>
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: [WSBARP] Test Email
Message-ID:
<CAMfCbawW_-LPTmvMUnNF3wtLHA6-F=np0Wokve8MW73O9FPChg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Good Monday!!

Sorry for the distraction. :)

-- 
*Creator of the first on-line Indian Will Production System - CHECK OUT *
*www.NativeWill.org* <http://www.nativewill.org/>

*Ms. Roberta Armstrong*

Washington State Bar Association No. 42343

Founder and Executive Director

Stewards of Indigenous Resources Endowment,

*a Non-Profit Professional Service Corporation *

P O Box 2248

Yelm, WA 98597

425.737.5448 | Direct

866.227.6651 | Fax

Roberta at IndianWillsOnWheels.org
www.IndianWillsOnWheels.org

Please note that the contents of this e-mail message are confidential and
may be legally privileged, being intended for the named recipient. Please
do not reproduce or transmit this message without permission of the
sender. If you have received this message in error notify the sender to
inform them of the inadvertent mistake and then delete this message from
your computer and server. Thank you in advance for your adherence.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/ffca039c/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 22:45:26 +0000
From: "John M. Riley III" <JMR at witherspoonkelley.com>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue
Message-ID:
<E2BDBB9A9C11724E8B46A60B618A971F012E710C7B at EX01.WKLAW.LOCAL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I assume RCW 64.06.040 (3), especially the sentence that says "After closing, the seller's obligation to deliver the real property transfer disclosure statement and the buyer's rights and remedies under this chapter shall terminate" eliminates the right to rescind after the sale closes no matter the failure to fill out the Form 17 completely. While this isn't the requestor's fact pattern, the commenters information leads me to ask, is this assumption incorrect?

John M. Riley III
Principal | Witherspoon ? Kelley
JMR at witherspoonkelley.com<mailto:JMR at witherspoonkelley.com> | Attorney Profile <http://www.witherspoonkelley.com/john-riley-1> | vCard<http://www.witherspoonkelley.com/s/jmr.vcf>

[WK]

422 W. Riverside Ave, Ste 1100
Spokane, WA 99201
(509) 624-5265 (office)
(509) 458-2728 (fax)
witherspoonkelley.com

Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, unauthorized use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Thank you.
From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Gregory L. Ursich
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 12:43 PM
To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv'
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

I agree with Annie?s interpretation. If Form 17 is incomplete, then 3 days does not start to run.

[ibdr2]

Gregory L. Ursich | Shareholder
Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
vCard<http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website<http://www.insleebest.com/> | gursich at insleebest.com<mailto:gursich at insleebest.com>

This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of atfitz at comcast.net<mailto:atfitz at comcast.net>
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 10:53 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

There has been significant discussion over this question among RE brokerage industry lawyers and not surprisingly, there is no single consensus answer. We would love for you to be a test case at the appellate level so we can have an answer!

I am of the opinion that because the questions seller must answer are statutorily mandated, seller MUST comply with seller's statutory obligations before the burden shifts to buyer to review and terminate or waive within three days of receipt. Until seller fully complies, buyer's termination period does not begin. It is not up to buyer to let seller know that seller did not comply with seller's statutory obligations.

The voices on the other side of the equation advocate the notion that courts will take a more reasonable approach and apply a common sense analysis over a black letter interpretation ... substance over form. Buyer had the opportunity to let seller know of a perceived failure in answering the questions and secreting that information away until a time that buyer wants to terminate the agreement is not "good faith" and would be frowned upon by a court.

I don't believe that you will find a lock solid answer to this question unless your client litigates and gets the answer for all of us.

________________________________
From: "Craig Blackmon" <craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com<mailto:craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com>>
To: "WSBA Real Property Listserv" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 10:34:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

I dunno. At a minimum, you can argue that the signed and dated acknowledgement constituted receipt of the "completed" form. If buyers thought the form was incomplete, they shouldn't have acknowledged receipt of it. But they did, and the three days ran. The more your facts are consistent with "buyer's remorse" and not anything to do with the actual Form 17, the stronger your argument.

That's what I'd argue if I were you. And I don't see any common law basis for rescission.

Craig

Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law
Seattle Real Estate Lawyer<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/>
92 Lenora St. (The Makers Space, a shared work environment)
Seattle WA 98121
Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949 Fax: (206) 770-7328
@LawyerBroker<https://twitter.com/LawyerBroker>
How to Buy Without an Agent<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Buy+without+an+Agent> | How to Sell FSBO<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Sell+FSBO> | RE Glossary<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Real+Estate+Glossary>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged nature. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all copies.

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Douglas W. Scott <doug at davisscottlaw.com<mailto:doug at davisscottlaw.com>> wrote:
I guess the questions are: did the buyer rescind based upon something generated from the unanswered questions? Why didn?t the seller eventually complete those 2 answers? Did the buyer ever ask that the seller complete them?

Douglas W. Scott
Law Offices of Douglas W. Scott
Windermere Building
1810 15th Place NW, Suite 203
Issaquah, Washington, 98027
V. 425.392.8550<tel:425.392.8550>
F. 425-392-2829<tel:425-392-2829>
www.davisscottlaw.com<http://www.davisscottlaw.com/>

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>] On Behalf Of Stephen Whitehouse
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 12:14 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue

Listmates,
I am looking for feedback on your experience with a Form 17 issue.
The form was fully filled out except two answers were left blank. No issue was ever raised and now, four days before closing, buyer is rescinding on that basis.
RCW 64.06.030 requires a "completed" statement. However, it also states that the buyer has two options to exercise within three days, to rescind or to approve and accept the statement. In this case the buyer approved and accepted.
Has the buyer waived the defect, either statutorily, or under the common law? I understand there is some conventional wisdom emanating from the MLS that the buyer can rescind, but I think they tend to take conservative positions.
Any thoughts?
Thanks.

Steve

Stephen Whitehouse
Whitehouse & Nichols, LLP
P.O. Box 1273
601 W. Railroad Ave.
Shelton, Wa. 98584
swhite8893 at aol.com<mailto:swhite8893 at aol.com>

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/4286bf2a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2843 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/4286bf2a/image001-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WK-Email-Logo_c39ae46e-8f64-41c9-b47d-7d62d54d7f68.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7508 bytes
Desc: WK-Email-Logo_c39ae46e-8f64-41c9-b47d-7d62d54d7f68.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/4286bf2a/WK-Email-Logo_c39ae46e-8f64-41c9-b47d-7d62d54d7f68-0001.png>

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:24:55 +0000
From: Mark Geyer <mgeyer at mgeyerlaw.com>
To: "wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] RE broker experienced with Palouse farmland
Message-ID:
<8C007B7C2A496E4B89C1AE7AF55F80BB32C297 at W14MBX-CH2-D2.W14D.comcast.net>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Does anyone know of any real estate brokers with current experience in sales of farmland on the Palouse?

Many thanks,

Mark

Mark J. Geyer, P.S.
PO Box 15733
Seattle WA 98115
(206) 849-7982 Telephone
mgeyer at mgeyerlaw.com<mailto:mgeyer at mgeyerlaw.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/207dc97a/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 16:34:21 -0800
From: Craig Blackmon <craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue
Message-ID:
<CAG1D8uahbXCwoUaTTNHyrkKp2t+dBk8Pgms65jmdC1Au4Oy1MA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I agree, generally. But there is lots of room for argument and possibly a
different result.

For example, the instructions require an explanation for every "yes" answer
to a question with an asterisk (and there are many). In my experience,
sellers fail to provide every single explanation actually required. Would
that also render the disclosure "incomplete" such that a right of
rescission exists until closing?

Or what about the fact that the NWMLS Form 17 goes beyond the statutory
language with a "n/a" option. Not hard to imagine an "incomplete"
disclosure that should have been checked "n/a" - but the statute doesn't
require that box to be checked. Rather per the statute the seller should
handwrite "n/a" if the question CLEARLY (quoted term) doesn't apply. What
if it arguably or probably doesn't apply? What answer - if any - is
required in order to trigger the three day right of rescission?

And finally, the statute requires the seller to sign every page - but the
Form 17 has initials only. Technically, absent signature on every page the
disclosure isn't complete. Surely THAT statutory requirement would not be
strictly enforced, so there must be some degree of flexibility.

I think further factual analysis is in order given the wiggle room. Good
luck Steve!

Craig

Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law
Seattle Real Estate Lawyer <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/>
92 Lenora St. (The Makers Space, a shared work environment)
Seattle WA 98121
Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949 Fax: (206) 770-7328
@LawyerBroker <https://twitter.com/LawyerBroker>
How to Buy Without an Agent
<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Buy+without+an+Agent> | How
to Sell FSBO <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Sell+FSBO>
| RE Glossary
<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Real+Estate+Glossary>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential
electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use
of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended
recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged
nature. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all
copies.

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Gregory L. Ursich <gursich at insleebest.com>
wrote:

> I agree with Annie?s interpretation. If Form 17 is incomplete, then 3
> days does not start to run.
>
>
>
> [image: ibdr2]
>
> *Gregory L. Ursich *| Shareholder
>
> Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
>
> P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
>
> vCard <http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website
> <http://www.insleebest.com/> | *gursich at insleebest.com
> <gursich at insleebest.com>*
>
> This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is
> intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you
> have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to
> the sender. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the
> attorney-client or any other privilege.
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.
> wsbarppt.com] *On Behalf Of *atfitz at comcast.net
> *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2016 10:53 AM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue
>
>
>
> There has been significant discussion over this question among RE
> brokerage industry lawyers and not surprisingly, there is no single
> consensus answer. We would love for you to be a test case at the appellate
> level so we can have an answer!
>
>
>
> I am of the opinion that because the questions seller must answer are
> statutorily mandated, seller MUST comply with seller's statutory
> obligations before the burden shifts to buyer to review and terminate or
> waive within three days of receipt. Until seller fully complies, buyer's
> termination period does not begin. It is not up to buyer to let seller
> know that seller did not comply with seller's statutory obligations.
>
>
>
> The voices on the other side of the equation advocate the notion that
> courts will take a more reasonable approach and apply a common sense
> analysis over a black letter interpretation ... substance over form. Buyer
> had the opportunity to let seller know of a perceived failure in answering
> the questions and secreting that information away until a time that buyer
> wants to terminate the agreement is not "good faith" and would be frowned
> upon by a court.
>
>
>
> I don't believe that you will find a lock solid answer to this question
> unless your client litigates and gets the answer for all of us.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Craig Blackmon" <craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com>
> *To: *"WSBA Real Property Listserv" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Sent: *Monday, November 7, 2016 10:34:56 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [WSBARP] Form 17 issue
>
>
>
> I dunno. At a minimum, you can argue that the signed and dated
> acknowledgement constituted receipt of the "completed" form. If buyers
> thought the form was incomplete, they shouldn't have acknowledged receipt
> of it. But they did, and the three days ran. The more your facts are
> consistent with "buyer's remorse" and not anything to do with the actual
> Form 17, the stronger your argument.
>
>
>
> That's what I'd argue if I were you. And I don't see any common law basis
> for rescission.
>
>
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
> Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law
>
> Seattle Real Estate Lawyer <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/>
>
> 92 Lenora St. (The Makers Space, a shared work environment)
>
> Seattle WA 98121
>
> Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949 Fax: (206) 770-7328
>
> @LawyerBroker <https://twitter.com/LawyerBroker>
>
> How to Buy Without an Agent
> <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Buy+without+an+Agent>
> | How to Sell FSBO
> <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Sell+FSBO> | RE
> Glossary
> <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Real+Estate+Glossary>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential
> electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use
> of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended
> recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged
> nature. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If
> you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all
> copies.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Douglas W. Scott <doug at davisscottlaw.com>
> wrote:
>
> I guess the questions are: did the buyer rescind based upon something
> generated from the unanswered questions? Why didn?t the seller eventually
> complete those 2 answers? Did the buyer ever ask that the seller complete
> them?
>
>
>
> Douglas W. Scott
>
> Law Offices of Douglas W. Scott
>
> Windermere Building
>
> 1810 15th Place NW, Suite 203
> Issaquah, Washington, 98027
> V. 425.392.8550
> F. 425-392-2829
>
> www.davisscottlaw.com
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.
> wsbarppt.com] *On Behalf Of *Stephen Whitehouse
> *Sent:* Friday, November 04, 2016 12:14 PM
> *To:* wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] Form 17 issue
>
>
>
> Listmates,
>
> I am looking for feedback on your experience with a Form 17 issue.
>
> The form was fully filled out except two answers were left blank. No
> issue was ever raised and now, four days before closing, buyer is
> rescinding on that basis.
>
> RCW 64.06.030 requires a "completed" statement. However, it also
> states that the buyer has two options to exercise within three days, to
> rescind or to approve and accept the statement. In this case the buyer
> approved and accepted.
>
> Has the buyer waived the defect, either statutorily, or under the
> common law? I understand there is some conventional wisdom emanating from
> the MLS that the buyer can rescind, but I think they tend to take
> conservative positions.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
> *Stephen Whitehouse*
>
> *Whitehouse & Nichols, LLP*
>
> *P.O. Box 1273*
>
> *601 W. Railroad Ave.*
>
> *Shelton, Wa. 98584*
> *swhite8893 at aol.com <swhite8893 at aol.com>*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/5a8b7111/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2843 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161107/5a8b7111/image001-0001.jpg>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

End of WSBARP Digest, Vol 26, Issue 7
*************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20161109/2ed08202/attachment.html>