You would certainly think that the attorney would have to represent
who ever was paying for him but that may not be the case.

If the contract says that you will pay for the builder's attorney, he
will represent the builder. You can check on that. I did and he was.
But I still had to pay because that is what the contract said.





"B a r r y B u r k e J r ." Keep it in the kyou
wrote in message ...
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:39:36 -0400, "Art Begun"
wrote:

What kills me is that in many states the buyer pays for the
attorney
and he will not open his mouth and say anything because he wants to
get the closing over with. In other states the builder may supply
the
attorney. If you let them you are letting yourself be screwed.
Some
other states don't involve attorney's any more. In those cases you
pay less for the closing and you get what you pay for.

An attorney represents the person who is paying his or her fee,
period.

If I was involved in any deal where my interests were not being
represented, I'd bring my own attorney.

Builders and selling real estate agents love to downplay the need
for
a buyer to hire an attorney, just like they downplay the need for a
3rd party inspector / engineer.

A home is usually one of the largest transactions of a person's
life.
I can't understand why everyone dosen't spend the $300-500 to have
their, and only their, interests protected.

FWIW, I am not an attorney, and I have nothing to do with any
attorney.

Barry