Short sales are a benefit to the seller, not the buyer. The only difference to the buyer is that someone must get the mortgage holder to agree to a lower payoff than the mortgage balance.
2007-12-05 10:35:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Godged is quite correct. A short sale is much the same as any other, save for the fact that the lender must approve the sale as well as the buyer, because the lender will end up being paid less than is owed on the property. The process is a bit slower because of this needed approval (which is not always granted)
You can inquire around, but my experience, as well as godged's, is that these properties go for market price or very close to same.
2007-12-05 07:55:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by acermill 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
short sales can close without postpone, 2 to 3 weeks or take 3 months or greater. this is probably the main important con when you consider which you are able to no longer purely opt for a ultimate date once you post an furnish. you need to wait for as long because it takes. this is usual 4 months later or not at all.
2016-10-19 07:11:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It’s my understanding that short sales can among the most frustrating real estate transactions. The bank involved knows they aren’t going to get the full amount they’re owed, but they are going to try and get as much as possible. For that reason, the bank may be very inflexible on price.
2007-12-05 07:40:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The biggest disadvantage is the lender has to approve the sale. In my area, they aren't any cheaper. The term "short sale" means the lender takes less to satisfy the loan than the lendee owes, not that the property is cheaper.
2007-12-05 07:36:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by godged 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
You must first ralize that the "short" in short sale has nothing to do with how long it will take to close.
2007-12-05 07:29:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by teran_realtor 7
·
0⤊
0⤋