Email Elizabethtds
The Remote Control Thorn from the Transfer Disclosure Statement
Before I share this amusing story with you about a transfer disclosure statement and remote controls for a garage door opener, let me preface it by saying this is not to single out any particular buyer’s agent in Sacramento because it could happen to anybody. You can’t examine my closed real estate transactions for the month and figure out who I am talking about because I have had a whole bunch of closings this February, but the story made me laugh, so you would probably like it.
To start with, I always advise my sellers when completing their transfer disclosure statement to think before they indicate how many remote controls they have in their possession for the garage door opener. I explain that they might want to put down one instead of two remotes, even if they own 2 remotes. The reason is often there is one person who is the last person in the house after it is sold. This person might go back to check on the house or pick up that last box of belongings, and when this person drives out of the garage and closes the garage door, this person tends to drive away with the remote control and not realize it.
It’s after escrow closes that this Sacramento real estate agent will often get a call from the buyer’s agent. The agent will demand that the seller provide restitution for the missing remote control because the transfer disclosure statement the seller signed promised 2 remote controls to the buyer and there is only one remote control. Most real estate agents I know do not want to deal with the issue of remote controls. We probably don’t even want to hear the words: remote control, yet we do. It’s like a thorn in our sides. That remote control thorn. It grows up out of cement all by itself without water or sunlight.
It all started with the closing last week of this particular home in Sacramento. First the buyer’s agent submitted a broker’s demand after closing asking for a higher commission split, although the commission was clearly shown in MLS. The agent said a speaker at the Sacramento Board of REALTORS meeting had recently explained that commission splits reflected in MLS are incorrect. That’s interesting. Because it is the commission in MLS that governs the transaction, so there is some sort of disconnect going on and confusion. That set me up for the question about remote controls.
The agent insisted that I had told her there were remote controls. Now, I know that I never talk about remote controls to buyer’s agents because, like I said, I do not much care for the remote control thorn. I don’t mention whether there are remotes, where the remotes would be kept, how many remotes the seller would own — I keep my mouth shut about remote controls.
I pulled out the transfer disclosure statement and looked at it. Sure enough, the box for remote controls was left unchecked. The line for the number of remote controls was left blank. The seller did not even disclose whether he had a remote control and, since he didn’t live in this house because it belonged to another family member, he probably did not have any remote controls nor any knowledge of their existence.
I sent the transfer disclosure statement to the buyer’s agent to show there were no remote controls conveyed with the property. The buyer’s agent sent me the AVID I had completed and insisted I noted there was a remote control. Under “garage and parking” I noted there was a garage door opener. I also said doors were stored in the rafters. No mention of a remote control. See, this is how miscommunication can happen in real estate. A garage door opener is not a remote control. It is a device secured to the ceiling that opens and closes the garage door when activated by a button attached to the wall or a remote control, but it is not a remote control.
Practical Tips for Completing Seller Disclosures
This helpful Sacramento real estate agent is about to provide you with simple proof that the seller disclosures — which are required for a seller to complete to sell a home in Sacramento — are not as complicated and horrendous to complete as most sellers believe. Seller disclosures are definitely worse than that. They are filled with trick questions and big, unfamiliar words, but what do you expect from forms designed by a team of lawyers? See, one lawyer is OK. Two lawyers are permissible. But when you get more than two lawyers in a room, especially those who serve on a committee and must come up with a mutual agreement by noon or no Big Mac for you, well, all holy hell tends to break loose, and you get what we have in California: a transfer disclosure statement and a seller property questionnaire that very few sellers can fill out without guidance from their Sacramento real estate agent.
But that’s what I’m here for. To carefully guide my clients through the complicated process. We affectionally call the seller property questionnaire the SPQ. That’s because we speak in acronyms to annoy everybody around us and to disguise the swear words we can’t say out loud in public. You think we real estate agents are really talking about one thing when it’s totally something else unprintable. But that’s why you can’t tell us apart from the homeless people who wander around Midtown and mutter. Homeless guy or agent with a Bluetooth device? See, you don’t know, and it’s OK.
The second thing you need to know about seller disclosures is don’t ever worry about what you write on them. You can say anything to a buyer, and the buyer will still buy the home. Don’t believe me? I have 3 words for you: snake infested house. In Idaho. True story, those first-time home buyers bought it anyway.
Some of the questions on the SPQ can confuse a seller. For example, you might not know if you have received an order from the government that identified your home as being contaminated by methamphetamine. Is your home a meth lab? Well, I dunno. Maybe you weren’t home when the government showed up? Hey, you have to go to work, you’re not home all the time, tapping your toes, just waiting to see if some government official is gonna drop by to inspect your home for meth and hand you an order. I mean, let’s get real. We all have stuff to do.
What about that question about a death in the home? What is an occupant? Are they referring to an occupant who is a human being or could it be an animal like a dog or a cat? What about bugs? Actually, bugs are covered elsewhere in the SPQ. Section F asks whether a homeowner has encountered any problems with cows or pigs, swooping cranes or flamingos or those nasty little ants from Argentina, don’t cry for me. But if a person has died in the house over the last 3 years, a seller needs to disclose. That’s a long time. Regardless, nobody needs to hear all of the gory details, how you snuck up on your husband while he was sleeping and stabbed him in the head with an ice pick over and over, unless of course you can tell us all where to buy an ice pick these days. And don’t tell me on the internet.
Probably the most difficult question most sellers struggle with is whether to answer yes or no. I realize it is very tempting to answer with both. That’s why the lawyers who designed the seller disclosures realized it was necessary to explain under the “seller awareness” section that the questions should be answered by checking either yes or no. You would think this doesn’t need an explanation, but I am fully confident that it does. Because yes can mean no, and no can mean yes. And there is no I don’t know, and there should be because sometimes, let’s face it, maybe you just don’t know. Is your pet a dog or a cat? Hard to tell. Could be both. Your kid found it in the street. It’s not your critter.
This is when you should call your Sacramento real estate agent. Don’t ask the guy down the street or your mail carrier because they are hiding out from the guys who work for the government. Those meth labs are everywhere these days. Can’t swing a dead cat without hitting one.
