RE: Limits to CoHousing
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.  

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.