Cracking down on bailing buyers

Editor's note: Republished with permission from TheRealDeal.com. Click here to view original article.

By MICHAEL RUDNICK

In this weak real estate market, new condo developers possess relatively little in their arsenals to arm themselves against the onslaught of purchasers seeking to back out of contracts. But there are a few measures developers can take to protect themselves without scaring off potentially legitimate buyers.

Some developers, for instance, are using new clauses designed to prohibit buyers from litigating their way out of deals.

Real estate attorney Adam Leitman Bailey pointed to clauses in which the buyer agrees to refrain from citing ILSA, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, as an excuse to break a contract. Bailey claimed that such a clause is not enforceable.

Under ILSA, a 41-year-old consumer protection law, condo developers with more than 99 units are required to file a project report with HUD, present a copy of the document to each buyer prior to the purchase agreement signing, and guarantee delivery of the apartment within two years.

As The Real Deal has reported, Bailey is representing between 150 and 200 buyers seeking to get out of contracts at approximately 20 projects throughout New York City, based on claims that developers did not comply with ILSA.

Another clause being enacted by some developers requires that the buyer forfeit a "certain amount of the deposit" and cover the sponsor's legal fees if they back out, Bailey said. This might entail the forfeiture of 10 to 15 percent of the purchase price based on a 20 percent deposit, he noted, saying that he believes such a clause is enforceable.

Sponsors are requesting this of buyers in exchange for offering discounted purchase prices, he said.

Another loophole buyers are now looking to in efforts to rescind contracts has to do with a project's "outside date," or planned completion date. Buyers are generally able to back out of contracts if the first closing does not occur before the outside date defined in the offering plan, private practice real estate attorney Michael Dym said.

Real estate lawyer Jeffrey Schwartz, a partner at Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz, added that developers have become more "careful" about setting outside dates in new offering plans. He said this is happening with some of the few new projects that are on the market now. Developers are making certain these dates are far enough out to be reasonably met, and can be extended if the buyer requests additional work on the unit, he said.

Schwartz said that developers must be careful about setting tight outside dates because "building completions and financing extensions are taking longer to get done [now]."

A group of 23 buyers at the Rushmore at 80 Riverside Blvd. are embroiled in a lawsuit with the building's sponsors, Extell Development and the Carlyle Group, due to what could be a very expensive clerical error involving an outside date. The offering plan stated that buyers would have the right to back out if the first closing did not occur before Sept. 1, 2008 -- which was supposed to have read Sept. 1, 2009, the New York Times reported.

Real estate attorney Richard Cohen has filed an application with state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's office requesting deposit refunds for the buyers, which would amount to roughly $10 million.

Strict adherence to building specifications is also atop the buyers' loophole list, but developers are trying to protect themselves against that now, too. ...CONTINUED

All rights reserved. This content may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this content without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.