Posted on 03/30/2010 8:10:56 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
What reasonable person would agree to this?
The same idiots who agree to sub-prime/balloon notes.
This is why I read every word of every contract I ever sign. I would not buy a home under this contract unless I got a discount sufficient to cover the extra cost that they are delaying and to cover the reduced value due to added difficulty in selling a house with such a gross provision attached. BTW, I would love to get the builders on a home that was going to stay in the family forever - go ahead and defer your profits without realizing that we’re not the transients you hoped for.
It would be kind of funny if a developer did this for a big neighborhood, everybody moved in, and nobody sold a house for 99 years, just passing them to the kids.
I wonder what would happen if someone with this kind of contract walked away from an underwater house? Would the bank be liable? Are banks going to take a big hit from this?
What a crock....This is gonna give realtors a new idea. I am sure they would like a piece of this future pie, as well. A homeowner already shares his “profits” with local government in the form of increased property taxes - or at least he did when the housing market was booming. What’s another 1%? Has Pelosi heard of this? She might like to cook up some new legislation. Can anyone say “Government Assisted Seller’s Program”(GASP)? Of course we will need another 16,500 IRS agents to make sure the assistance fee is collected....
My builder (from 1983) went out of business years ago.
But if he had imposed a 1% fee to him or his heirs or whoever he designates, then wouldn’t that open himself up to huge problems later on if I wanted to sue because of foundation problems or siding problems or whatever?
Luckily for me, he built a good home.
But imagine a builder being that accessible - that available for 99 years. If I were a builder, that 1 percent would just not be worth it.
Might be of interest ping.
This is one of those big “gotchas” that can only hurt Conservatives.
The same people who used to write credit card agreements are now in the title business apparently.
After getting their pocket picked over and over and over, the public suddenly finds they have no stomach for free markets and deregulation.
(of course the Democrats will ban this practice, only to devise a more onerous tax that works in similar fashion...but I digress)
Just because the seller (or developer in this case) asks for it, doesn’t mean they are going to get it.
If someone tried to slip a clause like this in a contract, I’d tell them where to stick it. There is plenty of houses for sale—plenty of COMPETITION.
Nobody is twisting your arm to buy a house with this kind of rider. It’s like neighborhood covenents. If you don’t want to live under them, don’t buy a house in a neighborhood with covenents.
You nailed it.
Nobody is twisting your arm to buy a house with this kind of rider. It’s like neighborhood covenents. If you don’t want to live under them, don’t buy a house in a neighborhood with covenents.
____________________________________________
And yet.... Millions of people voluntarily buy into homes with oppressive HOA dues and restrictions.
Go figure.
Yet another reason not to buy into places with “homeowner associations”.
Boycott home developers/developments and HOA neighborhoods.
The homes are generally poorly built, often on “fill” land. Who knows what problems are lurking in these places?
Excellent point.
I wonder if some of the same posters who say here "as long as it's in the contract. it's legal and I'm OK with it" are also posting on other housing threads that underwater homeowners should not mail in the keys and return their houses to the bank because, contract notwithstanding, they have a "moral obligation" to pay off the full amount borrowed.
It’s amazing how creative people can be when it comes to dipping their hands into other peoples’ pockets.
I hope the Texas legislature nips this thing in the bud.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.