|RE: Limits to CoHousing||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Bruce A. Duda (badudamailbox.syr.edu)|
|Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 08:19 CDT|
> > In terms of financial / social stresses, It could be a potential > problem. If someone has to sell a home for financial viability they > are perhaps going to want to make the best possible sale environment > and may not give prospective buyers a whole truth view, especially if > that works against the potential sale. In the Sharingwood declarations > we actually have a requirement that the name, address and phone of the > purchaser, escrow holder and realtor (if any) be delivered to the board > within 48 hours of the signing of a earnest money agreement. In this > way a comphrensive package which would include our internal covenants, > vision, policies, etc will be sent, as well as a statement on current > assessment dues. (Assessment debts survive sale). > > This package of information (which doesn't yet exist but is being > drafted) could very well de-rail a sale if the owner-seller didn't give > the whole picture to the prospective buyer. I would imagine in this > case it would cause the seller to be rather upset. Is there protection for the buyer? It sounds like s/he could louse his/her interest money if s/he came in inadequately informed. Why not require the information be part of the purchase agreement? I like the idea of a commitment to a place, but as a society we seem to move around a lot.
- RE: Limits to CoHousing, (continued)
- Re: Limits to CoHousing -Reply Rob Sandelin, April 26 1994
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.