I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.

writes:

I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

I've done transactions both ways. In Texas, real estate attorneys
were hardly ever used. In Illinois, they're quite often used, despite
very standardized forms.

Having a knowledgeable attorney in your corner at the closing table
who can speak authoritatively to things is very very nice, as is
having someone who doesn't get paid via a commission of the sale is
nice too. Here they can be had as inexpensively as $300 for a
transaction, though better folks are $550 or so. I've never regretted
that money spent that's for sure. They've always added value and
assurance to the transaction, especially in negotiation of repairs if
needed, and kept whatever finance folks were being used to eliminating
bullsh*t fees, etc. Also were a huge help when I sold a home myself.

If the transaction goes smoothly you'll feel like you saved money. If
you hit bumps or strangeness, you're gonna regret not having one.
Like many things in life, you can get by both ways, but for a few
hundred bucks, it's a very nice service to have. Realtors are okay,
but you have to keep in mind that even if they're on your side of the
closing table, a) they don't get paid unless the transaction occurs
and b) they don't have a law degree.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

Todd H. wrote:
writes:

I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

I've done transactions both ways. In Texas, real estate attorneys
were hardly ever used. In Illinois, they're quite often used, despite
very standardized forms.

Having a knowledgeable attorney in your corner at the closing table
who can speak authoritatively to things is very very nice, as is
having someone who doesn't get paid via a commission of the sale is
nice too. Here they can be had as inexpensively as $300 for a
transaction, though better folks are $550 or so. I've never regretted
that money spent that's for sure. They've always added value and
assurance to the transaction, especially in negotiation of repairs if
needed, and kept whatever finance folks were being used to eliminating
bullsh*t fees, etc. Also were a huge help when I sold a home myself.

If the transaction goes smoothly you'll feel like you saved money. If
you hit bumps or strangeness, you're gonna regret not having one.
Like many things in life, you can get by both ways, but for a few
hundred bucks, it's a very nice service to have. Realtors are okay,
but you have to keep in mind that even if they're on your side of the
closing table, a) they don't get paid unless the transaction occurs
and b) they don't have a law degree.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

Thank you Todd.

In article . com,
wrote:

I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

So, lets say that the home that you are buying is built 2 feet
over the right property line on land owned by an adjacent home
owner. Is your friend going to back you up and pay for any
damages in that case? WIll your friend move your house and
take care of all the bills associated with correcting the
mistake? Unless the answer is YES, then you need representation.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

John A. Weeks III wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

So, lets say that the home that you are buying is built 2 feet
over the right property line on land owned by an adjacent home
owner. Is your friend going to back you up and pay for any
damages in that case? WIll your friend move your house and
take care of all the bills associated with correcting the
mistake? Unless the answer is YES, then you need representation.


It's a condo so I doubt that any of those conditions would arise. As
for other potential issues, I am getting a full home inspection done.
My concerns lie more with paperwork and numbers rather than latitudes
and longitudes.

if this is your first buy sure a negotiator in your corner is nice. it
will be worth the money paid cuz they will get you more than that. like
have the seller pay for closing cost. have them throw in extra upgrades
for nothing. all the extras in a warrenty for nothing. and depending on
the market 6 months worth of payments. ask for the sky and go from
there.
bobby


wrote:
John A. Weeks III wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

So, lets say that the home that you are buying is built 2 feet
over the right property line on land owned by an adjacent home
owner. Is your friend going to back you up and pay for any
damages in that case? WIll your friend move your house and
take care of all the bills associated with correcting the
mistake? Unless the answer is YES, then you need representation.


It's a condo so I doubt that any of those conditions would arise. As
for other potential issues, I am getting a full home inspection done.
My concerns lie more with paperwork and numbers rather than latitudes
and longitudes.

wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.

It's not the numbers that needs review. It's all of the legal
documents.

It boils down to you and your friends comfort level. I keep reading
about people who didn't even know they were obtaining an adjustable
rate mortgage. That's pretty scary.

wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.


If everything works out fine with the purchase, you saved a few hundred
bucks. If there's a problem with the deal now or after you make the
purchase, it could cost you thousands. It's a form of insurance that you're
not going to get screwed (too badly).

wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.

The fact that you're asking the question in the 1st place suggests that
the answer is "Yes".

JM

wrote in message
ups.com...
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.

Yes, get representation. I've done it on 3 houses now and it's been worth
the cost each time. State and local laws are full of provisions that need
to be considered to protect you and "standard" contracts are standard only
for the seller.

What's the cost of the attorney compared to the total cost of the
transaction -- a few tenths of 1%? Even your time reading through that
stuff -- or handling the mess that could result -- has that much value.

TKM

"John Mianowski" wrote
wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A
friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is
recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy
to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard
contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting
representation?

Thanks.

The fact that you're asking the question in the 1st place
suggests that
the answer is "Yes".

Baloney.

wrote in message

...A friend of mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is
recommending that I dont waste any money on an attorney...


I don't think this is very good advice.

I have friends who want me to read legal contracts for them and explain what
they mean. I am willing to do this, but advise them that I am *not* an
attorney and I might not catch something which an attorney would see. I
explain that you get what you pay for and they would be better off with an
attorney.

Some people choose not to get an attorney and others choose to get an
attorney. If something goes wrong with those who do not get an attorney, at
least I warned them.

In school you learn a lot of things. When you learn a bit more, you learn
how much you do not know. A smart person will understand how much they do
not know about things and seek advice from an expert...

"Bill" wrote
In school you learn a lot of things. When you learn a bit
more, you learn how much you do not know. A smart person
will understand how much they do not know about things and
seek advice from an expert...

OTOH, a smart person will know that people do not qualify as
"experts" merely by holding a "professional" certification.

Attorneys had a virtual monopoly for centuries because the
information to which they were privvy was hard for an
ordinary person to access. But the internet's many legal
resources have meant the truth comes out: In many instances,
attorneys are no more than licensed clerks who do not
necessarily read carefully, pay attention to detail, or try
to get things done economically. Hence the market for
attorneys is much more competitive today. Their rates have
dropped. Their ads read like those of used car salespeople.

Plus attorneys do make mistakes. Since their first interest
must necessarily be their income, they are not necessarily
as likely to pay as close attention to a client's interests
as the client him/herself will.

From an attorney acquaintance of mine, addressing a client:
"No one is going to care about this as much as you do."

Do tell.

"Elle" writes:
"Bill" wrote
In school you learn a lot of things. When you learn a bit
more, you learn how much you do not know. A smart person
will understand how much they do not know about things and
seek advice from an expert...

OTOH, a smart person will know that people do not qualify as
"experts" merely by holding a "professional" certification.

And hence won't pick the attorney with the biggest ad i the yellow
pages.

Your attitude sounds to me like you've never had the benefit of a
good, experienced, conscientious and thorough real estate attorney.
They do exist.

Attorneys had a virtual monopoly for centuries because the
information to which they were privvy was hard for an
ordinary person to access. But the internet's many legal
resources have meant the truth comes out: In many instances,
attorneys are no more than licensed clerks who do not
necessarily read carefully, pay attention to detail, or try
to get things done economically. Hence the market for
attorneys is much more competitive today. Their rates have
dropped. Their ads read like those of used car salespeople.

Plus attorneys do make mistakes.

For which they are insured. If they screw up big, you aren't left
sleeping in your own filth.

Since their first interest must necessarily be their income, they
are not necessarily as likely to pay as close attention to a
client's interests as the client him/herself will.

From an attorney acquaintance of mine, addressing a client:
"No one is going to care about this as much as you do."

That's true. However, imagine if you team that self interest with the
experience of a seased real estate attorney to whom you can ask
questions and make sure that your self interest is being addressed?

I think arguing against spending $300-$500 on an attorney for a decent
sized real estate transaction is pretty silly, honestly.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

wrote...

I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

It's a condo so I doubt that any of those conditions would arise. As
for other potential issues, I am getting a full home inspection done.
My concerns lie more with paperwork and numbers rather than latitudes
and longitudes.

The best answer I can think of is that if you're concerned whether you
should hire an attorney, and you don't know whether you need an attorney,
and you're thinking about having a friend "go over the numbers" in lieu of
an attorney, then YOU SHOULD HIRE AN ATTORNEY!

Buying a house is a BIG deal. Don't risk it for the sake of a few hundred
dollars' savings...

Elle wrote:
"John Mianowski" wrote
wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A
friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is
recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy
to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard
contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting
representation?

Thanks.

The fact that you're asking the question in the 1st place
suggests that
the answer is "Yes".

Baloney.

Allow me to expand a bit: The OP clearly did not tell the whole story
in a 7-line post, nor should he be expected to. The fact that the OP
is asking this question in the 1st place suggests that, in his "gut",
something doesn't feel right. I'd recommend to anybody that they go
with their "gut".

Also, free legal advice from "...a friend who has closed on 3
properties in the past..." is often worth a lot less than what you pay
for it. What recourse do you have against the friend if he steers you
wrong? Most states don't have a "friends' victims recovery fund".

Care to expand on "Baloney", Elle?

JM

"Todd H." wrote
"Elle" writes:
"Bill" wrote
In school you learn a lot of things. When you learn a
bit
more, you learn how much you do not know. A smart
person
will understand how much they do not know about things
and
seek advice from an expert...

OTOH, a smart person will know that people do not qualify
as
"experts" merely by holding a "professional"
certification.

And hence won't pick the attorney with the biggest ad i
the yellow
pages.

Your attitude sounds to me like you've never had the
benefit of a
good, experienced, conscientious and thorough real estate
attorney.
They do exist.

I haven't felt the need for one, in my two home
transactions.

I have considered, and will continue to consider, going
something like FSBO but having a real estate attorney
represent me, etc.

Attorneys had a virtual monopoly for centuries because
the
information to which they were privvy was hard for an
ordinary person to access. But the internet's many legal
resources have meant the truth comes out: In many
instances,
attorneys are no more than licensed clerks who do not
necessarily read carefully, pay attention to detail, or
try
to get things done economically. Hence the market for
attorneys is much more competitive today. Their rates
have
dropped. Their ads read like those of used car
salespeople.

Plus attorneys do make mistakes.

For which they are insured.

Dunno if that's always true or sometimes true.

If they screw up big, you aren't left
sleeping in your own filth.

Maybe, maybe not. Either way the cost in time and energy to
correct a significant attorney's mistake is generally going
to be so high that people write it off.

Since their first interest must necessarily be their
income, they
are not necessarily as likely to pay as close attention
to a
client's interests as the client him/herself will.

From an attorney acquaintance of mine, addressing a
client:
"No one is going to care about this as much as you do."

That's true. However, imagine if you team that self
interest with the
experience of a seased real estate attorney to whom you
can ask
questions and make sure that your self interest is being
addressed?

I think arguing against spending $300-$500 on an attorney
for a decent
sized real estate transaction is pretty silly, honestly.

Do you use an attorney for every real estate transaction??

The realtor or real estate agent does carry a fair amount of
the burden if something does go wrong, ya know.

"John Mianowski" wrote
Allow me to expand a bit: The OP clearly did not tell the
whole story
in a 7-line post, nor should he be expected to. The fact
that the OP
is asking this question in the 1st place suggests that, in
his "gut",
something doesn't feel right. I'd recommend to anybody
that they go
with their "gut".

John, I think this dismisses the reality that most of us
don't "feel right in the gut" with the unfamiliar. That's
why the phrase, "do your homework" was invented.

IMO in this country there is a tendency to want to pay
others for knowledge that one often can obtain on one's own.
But what was the point of teaching kids to think critically
in school? To explore how this or that works, from the First
Amendment to an automobile engine to investing in stocks to
understanding the meaning of property transfer.

Please don't paint my answer as black and white. I am merely
trying to point out that people often can and should study
and research in areas with which they are initially
unfamiliar. We will all be richer for it. OTOH, we all also
can reach a point where we need a bona fide brain surgeon,
an Alan Dershowitz, or the best engineer money can buy to
lift a submarine off the ocean floor...

I rail against the attitude of giving people fish or telling
them to just buy fish. That's unempowering and turns us all
into ignorant couch potatoes who then vote and put fools
like ___ into office, etc.

"Elle" writes:

Do you use an attorney for every real estate transaction??

Since I moved to IL and found an attorney I really like, yes.

The realtor or real estate agent does carry a fair amount of
the burden if something does go wrong, ya know.

But the Realtor doesn't work for me. He may have agency to represent
me, but by definition, he gets paid when the sale closes, whether or
not the closing of that sale (with a given set of documenting
circumstances) is in my best interests or not.

I'm far more likely to trust someone I'm paying a flat rate to, who
financially doesn't care if a bad deal closes or not, who's also bound
by law to represent my best interests and my best interests alone, and
is also bound by attorney client confidentiality. Realtors
unfortunately don't have any of that going for them.

This is why my indepenently found inspector (not referred by the
Realtor) and my attorney are always the folks I am the most pleased
with in every real estate transaction. I'm confident of their advice
being bias-free because they get paid whether I buy the joint or not.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

"Todd H." wrote
"Elle" writes:

Do you use an attorney for every real estate
transaction??

Since I moved to IL and found an attorney I really like,
yes.

Okie doke. I do not find anything "wrong" per se in your
reasoning. I am just not prepared to say every real estate
transaction exhibits the same risk if one does not use an
attorney. Also, risk is present even with an attorney. I'd
say the more unusual or more expensive the property, the
more likely I would be to hire an attorney for the
sale/purchase.

Elle wrote:
"John Mianowski" wrote
Allow me to expand a bit: The OP clearly did not tell the
whole story
in a 7-line post, nor should he be expected to. The fact
that the OP
is asking this question in the 1st place suggests that, in
his "gut",
something doesn't feel right. I'd recommend to anybody
that they go
with their "gut".

John, I think this dismisses the reality that most of us
don't "feel right in the gut" with the unfamiliar. That's
why the phrase, "do your homework" was invented.

IMO in this country there is a tendency to want to pay
others for knowledge that one often can obtain on one's own.
But what was the point of teaching kids to think critically
in school? To explore how this or that works, from the First
Amendment to an automobile engine to investing in stocks to
understanding the meaning of property transfer.

Please don't paint my answer as black and white. I am merely
trying to point out that people often can and should study
and research in areas with which they are initially
unfamiliar. We will all be richer for it. OTOH, we all also
can reach a point where we need a bona fide brain surgeon,
an Alan Dershowitz, or the best engineer money can buy to
lift a submarine off the ocean floor...

I rail against the attitude of giving people fish or telling
them to just buy fish. That's unempowering and turns us all
into ignorant couch potatoes who then vote and put fools
like ___ into office, etc.

OK, but that's a pretty broad, sweeping brush you're using.

I wasn't trying to address all of society's ills, just answer 1 simple
question, that was asked without providing much background information
at all.

When somebody wonders whether they're up to a task, they probably
aren't (at least not 100% relative to the outcome that they desire).
Options include seeking the help of a more-competent 3rd party,
educating themselves on the subject, or plodding ahead anyway with
neither. Educating oneself on a topic is not always an option for
everybody. They may not have the time, aptitude, or interest in
learning more. In particular, those who ask questions on USENET often
don't have the time to thoroughly educate themselves, & USENET is a
notoriously poor place to do so if they did. For those issues that
affect "the gut", often no amount of research or "book-learnin'" will
be enough - sometimes there's no substitute for actual experience. I
could read every book ever written about hitting a baseball, but
without a whole lot of practice, I'm never going to play in the major
leagues.

Whatever you do for a living, I'm sure your customers could do for
themselves. However, they don't, because they understand that their
time & effort are better spent on other things, more central to their
own needs, & that you provide a good value for them to do what you do
for them. We could all do more for ourselves. Who today really has
the skills to make their own clothes, grind their own grain, or hunt
for meat with some chipped rock tied to the end of a stick? Once,
everybody could do all these things, but I don't think it's "baloney"
to seek specialized help in the modern world when you think you might
need it.

JM

"John Mianowski" wrote
Elle wrote:
"John Mianowski" wrote
Allow me to expand a bit: The OP clearly did not tell
the
whole story
in a 7-line post, nor should he be expected to. The
fact
that the OP
is asking this question in the 1st place suggests that,
in
his "gut",
something doesn't feel right. I'd recommend to anybody
that they go
with their "gut".

John, I think this dismisses the reality that most of us
don't "feel right in the gut" with the unfamiliar. That's
why the phrase, "do your homework" was invented.

IMO in this country there is a tendency to want to pay
others for knowledge that one often can obtain on one's
own.
But what was the point of teaching kids to think
critically
in school? To explore how this or that works, from the
First
Amendment to an automobile engine to investing in stocks
to
understanding the meaning of property transfer.

Please don't paint my answer as black and white. I am
merely
trying to point out that people often can and should
study
and research in areas with which they are initially
unfamiliar. We will all be richer for it. OTOH, we all
also
can reach a point where we need a bona fide brain
surgeon,
an Alan Dershowitz, or the best engineer money can buy to
lift a submarine off the ocean floor...

I rail against the attitude of giving people fish or
telling
them to just buy fish. That's unempowering and turns us
all
into ignorant couch potatoes who then vote and put fools
like ___ into office, etc.

OK, but that's a pretty broad, sweeping brush you're
using.

I wasn't trying to address all of society's ills, just
answer 1 simple
question,

Mighty broad brush yourself: "The fact that you're asking
the question in the 1st place suggests that the answer is
"Yes"."

It could as easily suggest, "no," since the OP is
intelligent enough to know to ask for others' experiences.

that was asked without providing much background
information
at all.

When somebody wonders whether they're up to a task, they
probably
aren't (at least not 100% relative to the outcome that
they desire).

I am stunned by the number of people I have known who, given
a little moral support, show themselves to be up to a task
about which they previously indicated apprehension.

snip stuff that I think is second guessing.

I suppose ultimately the point of all this exchange is to
maximize the OP's options by way of him/her seeing as many
opinions and experiences of others as possible. Mission
accomplished.

Re specialized help: You are repeating what I already noted
above. That says something. On Usenet, the ultimate
marketplace of ideas, with no verbal holds barred, my
patience for 'lack of smarts' is very low.

Most condos have lots of rules and restrictions and the purchase may be
more complicated than if you were buying a house. I would have an
attorney go over the documents for this one to be sure I understood
everything. Mistakes can be costly.





John Mianowski wrote:
wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.

The fact that you're asking the question in the 1st place suggests that
the answer is "Yes".

JM

wrote:
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.

An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to start
practicing his craft. Aunt Gertrude on the other hand takes a 60 hour
course and is a real estate agent.

Her firm wants her to charge $21,000 on a $300K sale and we're arguing
about $500 or less for an attorney to review the documents. Something
is wrong here.

"MD" writes:
An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to start
practicing his craft. Aunt Gertrude on the other hand takes a 60 hour
course and is a real estate agent.

Her firm wants her to charge $21,000 on a $300K sale and we're arguing
about $500 or less for an attorney to review the documents. Something
is wrong here.

LMAO... very well put.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

Dottie wrote:
Most condos have lots of rules and restrictions and the purchase may be
more complicated than if you were buying a house. I would have an
attorney go over the documents for this one to be sure I understood
everything. Mistakes can be costly.


And may not show up for years. I am conservative when it comes to
investments. No way would I consider making the biggest purchas of my
life without it being vetted by a licensed lawyer.

Harry K

"MD" wrote
An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to
start
practicing his craft.

And, holy mackerel, he still screws up.

Aunt Gertrude on the other hand takes a 60 hour
course and is a real estate agent.

Her firm wants her to charge $21,000 on a $300K sale and
we're arguing
about $500 or less for an attorney to review the
documents.

Sonny, it's pretty likely the attorney is going to charge a
heckuva lot more than $500 on a $300k transaction. I speak
from experience.

What I think you are trying to say though is that people
should avoid real estate agents altogether and just use
attorneys. Which of course begs the question as to why the
profession of "real estate agent" was invented in the first
place. Could it be because a sales transaction most of the
time is not rocket science and does not demand even a
college background to understand?

Regardless, if someone wants to skip the real estate agent
altogether, and just use a lawyer, FSBOing yada it, sure, I
happen to think that's a fine route to go. It's doubtful
both buyer and seller will see it this way, but it's nice if
they do (and simultaneously save a lot of money on
commissions), and one can try.

Something
is wrong here.

Namely, facts like how often people use attorneys in real
estate transactions.

You talk like there's something difficult in reviewing what
is most of the time boilerplate paperwork. The agent, along
with the brokerage, is in fact ultimately contracted to get
the paperwork right.

Condo paperwork should be easier, since land rights are
bound to be much more clearly covered by the condo's legal
papers (unless perhaps it's a very new condo community). The
condo naturally had serious work done by attorneys prior to
establishment. But churning is now an acceptable way to make
a living. Realtors do it. Attorneys do it. Etc.

An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to
start
practicing his craft.

And, holy mackerel, he still screws up.

You've brought nothing of value to the conversation. Like every other
human in every other profession, attorneys do make mistakes. That's
why they carry insurance.

Sonny, it's pretty likely the attorney is going to charge a
heckuva lot more than $500 on a $300k transaction. I speak
from experience.

I speak from experience as well and can cite examples.

What I think you are trying to say though is that people
should avoid real estate agents altogether and just use
attorneys.

I've stated facts, you draw your own conclusions. I will say that I'm
not against using real estate agents and have used them myself.

You talk like there's something difficult in reviewing what
is most of the time boilerplate paperwork. The agent, along
with the brokerage, is in fact ultimately contracted to get
the paperwork right.

That boilerplate language has meaning and can subject parties in a
transaction to a specific performance lawsuit, misunderstandings about
repairs, warranties, encroachments, closing dates, fixtures.....

Condo paperwork should be easier,

Wrong, why would adding lots of additional paperwork and conditions be
easier?

The condo naturally had serious work done by attorneys prior to
establishment.

And who did those attorneys represent?

"MD" ) writes:

And who did those attorneys represent?

It doesn't matter, they may have gotten it all wrong. Why involve your
own lawyer when you could represent yourself. Ask around on Usenet, visit
a few websites. If it's on the internet, it must be true.



[On a serious note, if you're buying or selling property, please have a
lawyer to represent your interests. It is the smart thing to do.]

wrote in message
ups.com...
I am about to begin the closing on a new home purchase. A friend of
mine who has closed on 3 properties in the past is recommending that I
dont waste any money on an attorney, as he will be happy to go over the
numbers for me.

This is a brand new development and we used a standard contract
downloadable from the MLS website.

Does anyone think it would be a big risk not getting representation?

Thanks.


Not a big risk for _most_ people. However, I've been through several
closings, and not one of them has gone "smoothly". Twice I've walked in not
knowing if the property would even change hands. Each closing has ended up
with dollar adjustments, usually hundreds of dollars, but in one case it was
$1500, and another time (commercial) it was $25,000. This was money I
received. In all cases the attorney was critical IMO to getting the money
and it really helped offset the cost and convenience of his services.

S

"Todd H." wrote in message ...
"Elle" writes:

The realtor or real estate agent does carry a fair amount of
the burden if something does go wrong, ya know.

But the Realtor doesn't work for me. He may have agency to represent
me, but by definition, he gets paid when the sale closes, whether or
not the closing of that sale (with a given set of documenting
circumstances) is in my best interests or not.

That's for sure. I've used several realtors, and was disappointed by all of
them. I've yet to come across a realtor I'd use a second time. However,
I've had the same RE attorney this whole time. In my experience the
realtors insulate themselves pretty good from all liability.

S

This entire thread was focused on the OP's question of whether to get
an attorney now that closing is at hand. What hasn't been brought up
is that much of the benefit of an attorney comes into play long before
closing. Just do a search through this newgroup and you will find
countless posts by people who signed contracts and got into all sorts
of bad situations by not having an attorney review the contract BEFORE
they signed.

That's when an attorney really earns his money, by making sure that the
contract is not one sided with provisions that are clearly detrimental
to your interests. With years of experience, he can spot things that
can be negotiated before the contract is signed. And he can earn it
when snags or issues come up that he can give legal advice on or help
to resolve.

Some other comments on issues brought up in this thread:

"Lawyers are more important for a condo because they have lots of rules
and regulations"

No lawyer is going to read the entire Master Deed, Bylaws, and Rules
and Regulations. That is something that you as the buyer must do.
Why? Because, first it would take many hours to go through literally
hundreds of pages and he'd have to bill seperately, as that is not
expected as part of representation at closing. Second, the attorney
has no way of knowing if a particular rule is of importance to you.
Rules can cover what color draperies are allowed, where you can park
your car, whether commerical vehicles are allowed on the property, what
type and size of pets may be allowed and when you may put out garbage
for pickup. There is no way an attorney can subsitute for the buyer
reading these rules themselves.

"Lawyers are going to charge a lot more than $500 on a $300K closing."

The lawyers I have dealt with did not charge based on the price of the
property. Most lawyers will quote a flat fee for a normal single
family home or condo purchase or sale. And $500-$700 is a typical range
here in NJ, where houses are going for a lot more than the above.

In article , Todd H. wrote:

But the Realtor doesn't work for me. He may have agency to represent
me, but by definition, he gets paid when the sale closes, whether or
not the closing of that sale (with a given set of documenting
circumstances) is in my best interests or not.


That is not true. The realtor does work for you and by law must look
after your interests. That's what agency is.


Dimitri

In article . com,
MD wrote:

An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to start
practicing his craft. Aunt Gertrude on the other hand takes a 60 hour
course and is a real estate agent.

Her firm wants her to charge $21,000 on a $300K sale and we're arguing
about $500 or less for an attorney to review the documents. Something
is wrong here.



Attorneys have a breadth of knowledge that a real estate broker does not
have. They learn about criminal law, for instance. I wouldn't want my
real estate broker representing me in a criminal trial (even if it was legal).
However, when it comes to real estate transactions, the depth of knowledge
is very similar.


In CA, members of the bar are allowed to become brokers by simply passing the
broker's exam. They do have to take the exam, however. If someone went to law
school but is not a member of the bar then they *still* have to take
two required courses in real estate. Therefore, a legal education in itself is
not necessarily sufficient.


As an aside, to be an attorney in CA one need not have ever graduated from
a law school.


Dimitri

D. Gerasimatos wrote:
In article . com,
MD wrote:

An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to start
practicing his craft. Aunt Gertrude on the other hand takes a 60 hour
course and is a real estate agent.

Her firm wants her to charge $21,000 on a $300K sale and we're arguing
about $500 or less for an attorney to review the documents. Something
is wrong here.



Attorneys have a breadth of knowledge that a real estate broker does not
have. They learn about criminal law, for instance. I wouldn't want my
real estate broker representing me in a criminal trial (even if it was legal).
However, when it comes to real estate transactions, the depth of knowledge
is very similar.


In CA, members of the bar are allowed to become brokers by simply passing the
broker's exam. They do have to take the exam, however. If someone went to law
school but is not a member of the bar then they *still* have to take
two required courses in real estate. Therefore, a legal education in itself is
not necessarily sufficient.


As an aside, to be an attorney in CA one need not have ever graduated from
a law school.


Dimitri

I was referring to a board certified real properlty attorney.

MD wrote:
D. Gerasimatos wrote:
In article . com,
MD wrote:

An attorney goes to college for about 7 years in order to start
practicing his craft. Aunt Gertrude on the other hand takes a 60 hour
course and is a real estate agent.

Her firm wants her to charge $21,000 on a $300K sale and we're arguing
about $500 or less for an attorney to review the documents. Something
is wrong here.



Attorneys have a breadth of knowledge that a real estate broker does not
have. They learn about criminal law, for instance. I wouldn't want my
real estate broker representing me in a criminal trial (even if it was legal).
However, when it comes to real estate transactions, the depth of knowledge
is very similar.


In CA, members of the bar are allowed to become brokers by simply passing the
broker's exam. They do have to take the exam, however. If someone went to law
school but is not a member of the bar then they *still* have to take
two required courses in real estate. Therefore, a legal education in itself is
not necessarily sufficient.


As an aside, to be an attorney in CA one need not have ever graduated from
a law school.


Dimitri

I was referring to a board certified real properlty attorney.

*property*

In article .com,
MD wrote:

I was referring to a board certified real properlty attorney.


In California, there is no such thing.


The certifications issued by the state bar a


Appellate Law
Bankruptcy Law
Criminal Law
Estate Planning, Trust, and Probate Law
Family Law
Immigration and Nationality Law
Taxation Law
Workers' Compensation Law


Additionally, the following certifications issued by private organizations
are accepted:


Business Bankruptcy Law
Consumer Bankruptcy Law
Creditors' Rights Law
Civil Trial Advocacy
Criminal Trial Advocacy
Family Law Trial Advocacy
Accounting Malpractice
Legal Malpractice
Medical Malpractice
Elder Law
Juvenile Law (Child Welfare)


Now, I realize some states do recognize a certification in real estate, but
as a California resident that doesn't help me.


Dimitri

wrote in message
ups.com...
This entire thread was focused on the OP's question of whether to get
an attorney now that closing is at hand. What hasn't been brought up
is that much of the benefit of an attorney comes into play long before
closing.

Agreed. I always check with my attorney even before making an offer, just
to make sure he isn't tied up or on vacation.


That's when an attorney really earns his money, by making sure that the
contract is not one sided with provisions that are clearly detrimental
to your interests. With years of experience, he can spot things that
can be negotiated before the contract is signed. And he can earn it
when snags or issues come up that he can give legal advice on or help
to resolve.

In Chicago contracts are fairly "standardized" however someone who doesn't
know any better might end up agreeing to modifications or exclusions worth
thousands of dollars.

S

"D. Gerasimatos" wrote in message
...
In article , Todd H. wrote:

But the Realtor doesn't work for me. He may have agency to represent
me, but by definition, he gets paid when the sale closes, whether or
not the closing of that sale (with a given set of documenting
circumstances) is in my best interests or not.


That is not true. The realtor does work for you and by law must look
after your interests. That's what agency is.

Thats never been my experience.

One realtor showed us lots of properties that she was also the listing agent
for, as if they were handled the same as any other property. Then when we
had an offer that was going to be accepted she had us sign some legal
document about dual agency and said someone else in the office would be
representing us for the final negotiations. Well, the sky didn't fall but
we probably gave up a few thousand by doing this.

Another realtor selling our house was a real gem. First, she told us NOT to
fix the tuckpointing. I can't even remember how many people loved the house
but ran their hands over the bricks and then walked away, never to be seen
again. Our first offer was a lowball that we turned down. Then she told us
we were in luck. An agent in her office had buyers that were looking for a
place just like ours at our price. But the buyers really dragged their
heels about making an offer, they'd take days to respond to our counter
offers, and it days had now become weeks. In that time our agent did
nothing to bring in other buyers and I'm convinced she was keeping people
away. She was salivating over the extra cut she'd get from the in-house
deal. I kept asking her to contact our original lowballers and she kept
putting us off. Finally, I had to flat out told her to do it because we
weren't going to work with her in-house people.

The realtor we used to buy our first house told us just to put down $5000
earnest money in the contract for a $173000 home purchase. Had we put more
earnest money, we probably could have bought the house for at least several
thousand less.

Sadly no realtor I've used has represented my interests, even by chance.

S

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:05:23 GMT, "Elle"
wrote in .net:

[on the subject of whether or not to use an attorney for a closing]

IMO in this country there is a tendency to want to pay
others for knowledge that one often can obtain on one's own.
But what was the point of teaching kids to think critically
in school?

The value of a good attorney is not just knowledge, but experience.
The former can be obtained from a book. The latter cannot.
--
Charles Calvert | Software Design/Development
Celtic Wolf, Inc. | Project Management
http://www.celticwolf.com/ | Technical Writing
(703) 580-0210 | Research