DVC Resale Contract Advice Needed

[ELMC]

I really see both points here, but I am also struggling to see why the broker is being defended so strongly as well.

After initially indicating funding was required up-front with the offer, do you honestly believe the broker should not place that as a contingency to the deal? There is no reason a time frame cannot be placed around that clause that then satisfies both parties. I'll say it again, advising the buyer to ignore the omission because it's an unlikely occurence is either poor or unethical advise.

Bottom line, the broker is unwilling to budge and I'd be weighing the risk of moving forward. If I have great credit it's really not a risk. If I don't have great credit and I'm concerned with getting denied, then I probably should not enter into a new financial obligation at this time.

Thanks for your respectful disagreement. I'll try to address your points.

I am defending the broker because I believe that the OP is engaging in speculation and is accusing the broker of being unscrupulous while providing no evidence to support that. I feel this is unfair and unwarranted in this situation. The broker is not here to defend themselves and I took it upon myself (rightly or wrongly) to say something.

My understanding of the situation is that the OP is asking for a funding contingency that persists right up until closing. In that case, I do not think the broker should put that contingency in the contract or even bring it to the seller as an option. It is non-standard and it puts the seller and the contract at significant risk. If the OP is simply asking for the contract to reflect the fact that she is financing then there is no harm in having the contract reflect that. I'm a stickler for accuracy and that would be the most accurate way to word the contract. But even that won't change or necessitate the removal of the clause that the contract is not contingent upon the buyer obtaining financing. That clause exists so that the buyer can't back out after the ten-day recission period. Given that financing eligibility can always be determined prior to the expiration of the ten-day period (some companies GUARANTEE approval - no credit check at all) this conversation is essentially moot. The ten-day recission period accomplishes the same thing that the funding contingency would accomplish and is therefore redundant.

I want to be clear here because it has come up twice...I am not advising that the OP ignore any omissions or put herself at risk in any way. What I am saying is that the request for a financing contingency that extends past the ten-day period is non-standard and is very biased towards the buyer. It will not be approved and in my opinion, is an unreasonable request. Accusing the broker of misdealings because of this is also not appropriate.

We strongly agree on one thing, nobody should put themselves in a situation where they risk losing their deposit or otherwise put themselves in a position where they can't follow through on a contract. Where we disagree is that I am saying that if the OP follows the proper steps that this will not occur given the parameters of the transaction. Asking for a funding contingency that extends past the ten-day recission period because the funding company might go out of business is unreasonable.

 

[ELMC]

Do you see the irony here? You don’t like the “character assassination”. That’s all you’ve been doing. You’re accusing the broker even though you are wrong ( but still seem hell bent on stating your case), then you accuse another poster for working for the brokerage. Your accusations and made up scenarios are outrageous. I’m shocked reading this thread.

But you can't stop reading, can you. It's like a car accident. You know if you look you're going to see something gruesome, but still, you look.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

Oh my. you are far too risk adverse. If you are not open to any risk at all the best for you is to book a standard hotels room, pay rack rate and have the right to cancel.

I think this highlights this thread well. I'm fairly risk averse too. Before purchasing, I made sure I understood the probability and effects of all the possible risks that could occur. At some point though, you have to take some risk, and have plans in place to deal with the possible consequences. If your not willing to accept the risks, then perhaps a long term, major financial obligation is not best suited for you.

 

[kcall13]

It happens, but it is very rare. While there is a contract in place for rental situations, it is still a higher risk than your standard DVC purchase. The strength of the system is trust, and it does not sound like that is going to be enough to keep you comfortable.

I would STRONGLY recommend AGAINST you renting points for a reservation. Even if it works out, which is highly likely, it's not going to be a fun ride for you.

That is excellent advice given I am clearly not comfortable with what if situations. I am strongly considering withdrawing my offer today as someone advised I am probably already too late to get my booking for 12/2020. If that is the case I may as well wait to do this when I have the cash funding in December and not pay all of these finance charges. Seems like I should be able to find the points I want at a similar price -- ie I am currently getting 145 pp with seller paying closing costs.

 

[ELMC]

I think this highlights this thread well. I'm fairly risk averse too. Before purchasing, I made sure I understood the probability and effects of all the possible risks that could occur. At some point though, you have to take some risk, and have plans in place to deal with the possible consequences. If your not willing to accept the risks, then perhaps a long term, major financial obligation is not best suited for you.

Oh my, we haven't even thought about how the OP will react to point reallocations, maintenance fee increases, new restrictions (which will probably be grandfathered but that's not guaranteed) and the like. Chuck, this is NOT a love connection. (Awesome 80s reference. If you don't get it, head to the Googles.)

 

[Lumpy1106]

TLDR the thread, but I will say DVC Resale Market is the best. I trust them more than any of the DVC guides (and there are some truly outstanding DVC guides too). If you have a beef with them then I would say it's time for a long look in the mirror.

 

[luvdisneyland]

But you can't stop reading, can you. It's like a car accident. You know if you look you're going to see something gruesome, but still, you look.

Haha, yes... I clearly have too much time on my hands

 

[kcall13]

But you can't stop reading, can you. It's like a car accident. You know if you look you're going to see something gruesome, but still, you look.

I'm sorry I don't think I may have been very clear. My aggravation with the agent is based on two things.

1. he will not present my request for the change to seller and has told me he will tell seller I backed out after time to sign expires -- this is simply not the truth and in my opinion is very unethical. If agent represents seller he should be forthcoming and afford seller the opportunity to make the decision that he is most comfortable with. If I were a seller and lost a deal over something like this having to start again I would be VERY angry.

2. Agent advised me to sign the contract and just hold back the deposit until I get my funding. I personally feel like that is dishonest and a potential waste of time on everyone's part.

These are the facts and I am not misunderstanding them.

 

[ELMC]

Not true I appreciate the insight greatly but the character assassinations not so much. This is a large purchase and it is important to me so I am reasonably concerned when an agent refuses to take my request to a seller and then tells me to just sign and not comply with the terms. I only have 7-days for them to receive my deposit which I must over night so I have 5 days to get my funding in order and not 2. I just don't feel comfortable with this type of deal where I place myself at potential risk and have no real experience to accurately gauge what my true risk is. Hence the reason I asked for the funding contingency to be listed accurately. If seller refuses to move forward and prefers to wait on another offer that should be his choice not Agents.

What I don't think you understand is that it is not up to the broker to bring this request to the seller to for the seller to approve or disapprove of it. The broker is a transaction broker which means that they are beholden to neither the buyer nor the seller, but to the contract. Installing a funding contingency that persists up until closing is contrary to the best interests of the contract and therefore not something that the broker should even consider. To do so would be a breach of their fiduciary responsibility, likely a violation of Florida law, and would also be very, very bad for the seller.

 

[kcall13]

I’ve never seen such a paranoid person, the glass is half empty here. It’s great to use due dillagence, but the distrust this person has is astonishing.

I absolutely do not trust banks -- this is true. perhaps if I had more experience this would not be an issue. What I have learned here is that I shouldn't buy until I can purchase outright absent funding given the non negotiable contingency in place so thank you all for your help in coming to a conclusion. I am going to advise agent that we are not moving forward so Seller does not lose any more time. Thanks so much!

 

[kcall13]

What I don't think you understand is that it is not up to the broker to bring this request to the seller to for the seller to approve or disapprove of it. The broker is a transaction broker which means that they are beholden to neither the buyer nor the seller, but to the contract. Installing a funding contingency that persists up until closing is contrary to the best interests of the contract and therefore not something that the broker should even consider. To do so would be a breach of their fiduciary responsibility, likely a violation of Florida law, and would also be very, very bad for the seller.

I hadn't thought about it that way -- I am looking at this as a real estate transaction I suppose. Perhaps in that case I have not been fair to agent. I actually am not unreasonable I am just very cautious perhaps because I am a newb. Thanks for sharing that!

 

[ELMC]

I'm sorry I don't think I may have been very clear. My aggravation with the agent is based on two things.

1. he will not present my request for the change to seller and has told me he will tell seller I backed out after time to sign expires -- this is simply not the truth and in my opinion is very unethical. If agent represents seller he should be forthcoming and afford seller the opportunity to make the decision that he is most comfortable with. If I were a seller and lost a deal over something like this having to start again I would be VERY angry.

2. Agent advised me to sign the contract and just hold back the deposit until I get my funding. I personally feel like that is dishonest and a potential waste of time on everyone's part.

These are the facts and I am not misunderstanding them.

You have been clear on both of these points and quite frankly, you're not correct in your interpretations of what is happening. The contract is proper. If you refuse to sign it because the broker will not install a funding contingency that persists up until the date of closing then you are de facto backing out of the contract. By advising you to withhold your deposit until after you get your funding the broker is actually giving you the EXACT protection that you are looking for. And for this he is rewarded by your calling him dishonest and accusing him of wasting everyone's time.

I say this with all due respect, but there is a LOT about this process that you do not understand. Your broker is trying to help you every way he can, and you are either not recognizing it or unwilling to accept help in the form it is taking. Either way, I think we've all come to the same conclusion, it would probably be best for you to end this while you still can.


ETA: I was typing this post during the time the OP posted directly above. It actually makes more sense if you read this post and then the post above it because had I read that first it would have changed how I worded this post slightly.

 

[luvdisneyland]

I'm sorry I don't think I may have been very clear. My aggravation with the agent is based on two things.

1. he will not present my request for the change to seller and has told me he will tell seller I backed out after time to sign expires -- this is simply not the truth and in my opinion is very unethical. If agent represents seller he should be forthcoming and afford seller the opportunity to make the decision that he is most comfortable with. If I were a seller and lost a deal over something like this having to start again I would be VERY angry.

2. Agent advised me to sign the contract and just hold back the deposit until I get my funding. I personally feel like that is dishonest and a potential waste of time on everyone's part.

These are the facts and I am not misunderstanding them.

Again, you are not wanting to hear how this works. He ( probably after speaking to his manager) was advised that they will not make changes to a sales contract, period. He was upfront about that with you, and you don’t like it. I’m sure now, more than ever, they are glad they didn’t, as this whole thing is a huge red flag. I’m sure if he did tell the seller what is transpiring, the seller would at, the very least be relieved, but more than likely would advise the agent to cancel the deal and move on to a buyer who understands the process better – I just don’t see this sale going to fruition. You were asking a company to change the way they do business to accommodate you and it’s not going to happen, you need to deal with that. Item 2. makes perfect sense and it is not dishonest at all, again, you’ve been told this but don’t like the answers.

 

[luvdisneyland]

You have been clear on both of these points and quite frankly, you're not correct in your interpretations of what is happening. The contract is proper. If you refuse to sign it because the broker will not install a funding contingency that persists up until the date of closing then you are de facto backing out of the contract. By advising you to withhold your deposit until after you get your funding the broker is actually giving you the EXACT protection that you are looking for. And for this he is rewarded by your calling him dishonest and accusing him of wasting everyone's time.

I say this with all due respect, but there is a LOT about this process that you do not understand. Your broker is trying to help you every way he can, and you are either not recognizing it or unwilling to accept help in the form it is taking. Either way, I think we've all come to the same conclusion, it would probably be best for you to end this while you still can.

LOL, I just typed the same thing, maybe we both work for the broker

 

[ELMC]

I hadn't thought about it that way -- I am looking at this as a real estate transaction I suppose. Perhaps in that case I have not been fair to agent. I actually am not unreasonable I am just very cautious perhaps because I am a newb. Thanks for sharing that!

This is a very honest and refreshing admission. Thank you for saying this.

In a post above someone mentioned a broker who created situations where they used phantom buyers to guaranteed commissions on contracts that haven't sold. THAT is a problem but that is not anything like what is happening here. I'm glad we could help you recognize that. Good luck with your wedding and with your research on DVC.

 

[Lumpy1106]

God I know I am going to regret this, but;
What stage are you at? Have you presented the offer and it's been accepted? Have you made it through ROFR? Because no matter what you and the seller agree to Disney could still take the contract through ROFR, and frankly Disney won't have any of the contingencies you are upset about - they'll just buy the contract, clean and simple. If I'm the seller I'm kindof rooting for that at this point.

Free advice, take it for what it's worth, but I see you have 3 good options;
1) make an offer, no special contingencies, let DVC Resale do what they do best, take a chance on the contract making it through ROFR, the financing coming through, and closing in time for the 11 month window for your wedding.
2) Buy direct - have the contract in plenty of time for your wedding
3) walk away, rent points or pay rack rate for the wedding
That's it. You could always go with option 1 and it won't affect your ability to go with options 2 or 3 if things don't work out. Life is too short for all the drama.

 

[kcall13]

God I know I am going to regret this, but;
What stage are you at? Have you presented the offer and it's been accepted? Have you made it through ROFR? Because no matter what you and the seller agree to Disney could still take the contract through ROFR, and frankly Disney won't have any of the contingencies you are upset about - they'll just buy the contract, clean and simple. If I'm the seller I'm kindof rooting for that at this point.

Free advice, take it for what it's worth, but I see you have 3 good options;
1) make an offer, no special contingencies, let DVC Resale do what they do best, take a chance on the contract making it through ROFR, the financing coming through, and closing in time for the 11 month window for your wedding.
2) Buy direct - have the contract in plenty of time for your wedding
3) walk away, rent points or pay rack rate for the wedding
That's it. You could always go with option 1 and it won't affect your ability to go with options 2 or 3 if things don't work out. Life is too short for all the drama.

That is very good advise and at this point I think I am going to take a step back and learn a bit more about how all of this works so I can make a more knowledgeable decision. Certainly don't want to cause seller any hardship by hanging it along for 10 days -- seems mean. Wedding planning already has me on edge over here lol

 

[ELMC]

TLDR the thread, but I will say DVC Resale Market is the best. I trust them more than any of the DVC guides (and there are some truly outstanding DVC guides too). If you have a beef with them then I would say it's time for a long look in the mirror.

I will disagree with you on one thing, this thread is NOT a TLDR situation. Seriously, it's a wild ride and you should read every post. And it has a happy ending...what more could you ask for?

 

[luvdisneyland]

I hadn't thought about it that way -- I am looking at this as a real estate transaction I suppose. Perhaps in that case I have not been fair to agent. I actually am not unreasonable I am just very cautious perhaps because I am a newb. Thanks for sharing that!

Glad to hear it, now perhaps you can apologize to the agent and revise your accusations, that would be the right thing to do.

 

[ELMC]

Wedding planning already has me on edge over here lol

Gee, we hadn't noticed.

Seriously, though, it was a rough entry, but welcome to the DIS. We are glad to have you and there is a lot of great information on here. I'm sure you will find it helpful as you investigate DVC.